QANTAS - Australia II
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: MELBOURNE
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pegasus 747
Well said Pegasus 747!!
No one in here takes lowerlobe seriously, as he is very transparent ie. he is probably a whinging non FAAA member.
lowerlobe says he went to the FAAA meetings...... funny how he didnt criticise the FAAA in front of MM or that he did not vote against the resolution that was put at the meeting, becuause only 1 person voted against it out of 814 who attended the meetings and that was MM's predecessor.
So obviously lowerlobe is either a non member or even worse a coward who cannot criticise in public but rather is content to post innane and anonymous attacks on the FAAA in here.
In any case, he is not to be taken seriously.....and i'm sure most in this forum don't.... and certainly he is totally out of touch with mainstream views of the vast majority of crew.
No one in here takes lowerlobe seriously, as he is very transparent ie. he is probably a whinging non FAAA member.
lowerlobe says he went to the FAAA meetings...... funny how he didnt criticise the FAAA in front of MM or that he did not vote against the resolution that was put at the meeting, becuause only 1 person voted against it out of 814 who attended the meetings and that was MM's predecessor.
So obviously lowerlobe is either a non member or even worse a coward who cannot criticise in public but rather is content to post innane and anonymous attacks on the FAAA in here.
In any case, he is not to be taken seriously.....and i'm sure most in this forum don't.... and certainly he is totally out of touch with mainstream views of the vast majority of crew.
worse
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’m in trouble with my missus as I was laughing so much after reading the faaa’s letter.The wife had just made brunch and I was laughing so much I wasn’t eating any.
I reckon the best part was that out of the thousands of crew it was not possible that any of us could not think of something that the faaa has not. I’m not overly religious but there is only one being that knows everything and it aint the faaa. Pal ,we did not vote for you because we reckon you are brain surgeons ,you were elected because no one else put their hand up except the other clowns who screwed up as well.
The other hilarious part in one of their letters is that the union reckons that the company laughs at cabin crew.To whoever in the union wrote that , mate if you want to see who the company is laughing at all you have to do is look in a mirror.
How do you know when a faaa official is at your party? …… he will tell you
It’s not as if we do not have enough to be concerned about with both the new IR laws and the takeover we also have to carry the faaa as well.
I reckon these clowns could not find the floor if they fell out of bed.
Now onto something serious,my idea was not to stop the takeover but to pool all of our shares to have a say in the company.
I reckon the best part was that out of the thousands of crew it was not possible that any of us could not think of something that the faaa has not. I’m not overly religious but there is only one being that knows everything and it aint the faaa. Pal ,we did not vote for you because we reckon you are brain surgeons ,you were elected because no one else put their hand up except the other clowns who screwed up as well.
The other hilarious part in one of their letters is that the union reckons that the company laughs at cabin crew.To whoever in the union wrote that , mate if you want to see who the company is laughing at all you have to do is look in a mirror.
How do you know when a faaa official is at your party? …… he will tell you
It’s not as if we do not have enough to be concerned about with both the new IR laws and the takeover we also have to carry the faaa as well.
I reckon these clowns could not find the floor if they fell out of bed.
Now onto something serious,my idea was not to stop the takeover but to pool all of our shares to have a say in the company.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australian newspaper editorial
as pointed out on another thread here on pprune. read it ,copy it and send it to ur friends in canberra.
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/members/mi-alpha.asp
Editorial: Dangers lurking in the cult of the deal
December 16, 2006
Private equity buyouts challenge the nature of capitalism
YOU need not subscribe to the barricades school of economic populism to be concerned about the rash of private equity deals sweeping through Australia and the global economy, of which the proposed $11 billion takeover of Qantas is just the latest example. There is every reason to worry that in using sophisticated and opaque accounting techniques to snatch up companies such as Qantas while minimising their tax contribution to the community, private equity firms are enriching a handful of clever financial engineers and sowing the seeds of the next recession, while in the process tearing down once-great Australian brands. The consortium of raiders assembled to buy Qantas at $5.60 a share is still getting something of a bargain, thanks to investors' historic wariness of airlines. Under the terms of the deal, Macquarie Bank will own 15 per cent of the carrier while offshore investors will take 40 per cent. And although it will probably be refloated in five to 10 years, if the deal is approved Qantas shares will for now cease to trade publicly. In a hopeful sign of the buyers' good intentions, CEO Geoff Dixon has pledged to stay on for at least three years.
Yet a closer look reveals reasons to be less sanguine. Traditionally, when a buyer purchases a company, they assume the operational and tax risks associated with the venture. But the way deals such as the Qantas purchase are structured shifts these burdens onto banks and their customers, as well as the federal government - that is, ordinary taxpayers and citizens. Meanwhile the handful of bankers and accountants responsible for engineering the deal will cream off huge guaranteed success fees, progress fees and then more fees once again when they return the company to the sharemarket. Combined with the fees gouged out of ordinary Australians by Macquarie Bank for the use of basic infrastructure, including Sydney airport, it is easy to see why the public's suspicion is aroused. Central bankers, too, are concerned about the very real threat created by private equity firms gearing themselves so heavily to buy so much debt. The fear is that if central banks raise interest rates to rein in the massive amounts of cash sloshing around the global markets they will cause such structures to collapse, with banks and individual investors left holding the bag. Australians who remember the financial crash of the late 1980s, as well as the tech bubble burst at the turn of the century, are right to feel a flicker of nervousness. These dangers have made for strange bedfellows: ACTU secretary Greg Combet has called Qantas's buyers "parasites", while NAB chief John Stewart warns that the wave of private equity deals could "all end in tears". Even if it does not, given Macquarie Bank's record of hiking prices while cutting service at its other assets such as Sydney airport, there is every reason to be concerned that Qantas service will suffer. And given that Macquarie Bank already controls Sydney airport, its stake in Qantas will create a conflict of interest when it comes to opening up more gates to competing carriers. Already Qantas's value is artificially increased by government policies that protect it from would-be competitors such as Singapore Airlines, which would love to compete on valuable trans-Pacific routes. In an attempt to allay such fears, Mr Dixon assured viewers of Thursday night's 7:30 Report that the travelling public would not see any difference in Qantas service. And to his great credit, he also pledged on Thursday to place his personal windfall from the sale, which could amount to $60 million, into a charitable trust.
While The Australian is a strong supporter of the principle of private ownership and minimal government interference in the markets, we also believe markets do not exist in a moral or financial vacuum. Rather, they exist to see the economy's benefits flow to the maximum number of people in the most efficient way. The great moral defence of capitalism is that it is the most efficient way of producing wealth that benefits the greatest number of people. But the present enthusiasm for private equity takeovers of public companies seems to have flipped this idea on its back. The great industrialists of last century who built Qantas, to say nothing of men like Henry Ford, all made their fortunes by taking risks in the marketplace to build companies that provided new goods and services. Today's private equity mavens deliberately avoid both risk and market scrutiny. All of this sets a tough challenge for the regulators. Peter Costello has not tipped his hand, saying only that although the deal meets foreign ownership requirements he will still apply a national interest test to the sale. This deal means it may be time to have a broader conversation about the role such transactions play in our economy.
merry christmas
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/members/mi-alpha.asp
Editorial: Dangers lurking in the cult of the deal
December 16, 2006
Private equity buyouts challenge the nature of capitalism
YOU need not subscribe to the barricades school of economic populism to be concerned about the rash of private equity deals sweeping through Australia and the global economy, of which the proposed $11 billion takeover of Qantas is just the latest example. There is every reason to worry that in using sophisticated and opaque accounting techniques to snatch up companies such as Qantas while minimising their tax contribution to the community, private equity firms are enriching a handful of clever financial engineers and sowing the seeds of the next recession, while in the process tearing down once-great Australian brands. The consortium of raiders assembled to buy Qantas at $5.60 a share is still getting something of a bargain, thanks to investors' historic wariness of airlines. Under the terms of the deal, Macquarie Bank will own 15 per cent of the carrier while offshore investors will take 40 per cent. And although it will probably be refloated in five to 10 years, if the deal is approved Qantas shares will for now cease to trade publicly. In a hopeful sign of the buyers' good intentions, CEO Geoff Dixon has pledged to stay on for at least three years.
Yet a closer look reveals reasons to be less sanguine. Traditionally, when a buyer purchases a company, they assume the operational and tax risks associated with the venture. But the way deals such as the Qantas purchase are structured shifts these burdens onto banks and their customers, as well as the federal government - that is, ordinary taxpayers and citizens. Meanwhile the handful of bankers and accountants responsible for engineering the deal will cream off huge guaranteed success fees, progress fees and then more fees once again when they return the company to the sharemarket. Combined with the fees gouged out of ordinary Australians by Macquarie Bank for the use of basic infrastructure, including Sydney airport, it is easy to see why the public's suspicion is aroused. Central bankers, too, are concerned about the very real threat created by private equity firms gearing themselves so heavily to buy so much debt. The fear is that if central banks raise interest rates to rein in the massive amounts of cash sloshing around the global markets they will cause such structures to collapse, with banks and individual investors left holding the bag. Australians who remember the financial crash of the late 1980s, as well as the tech bubble burst at the turn of the century, are right to feel a flicker of nervousness. These dangers have made for strange bedfellows: ACTU secretary Greg Combet has called Qantas's buyers "parasites", while NAB chief John Stewart warns that the wave of private equity deals could "all end in tears". Even if it does not, given Macquarie Bank's record of hiking prices while cutting service at its other assets such as Sydney airport, there is every reason to be concerned that Qantas service will suffer. And given that Macquarie Bank already controls Sydney airport, its stake in Qantas will create a conflict of interest when it comes to opening up more gates to competing carriers. Already Qantas's value is artificially increased by government policies that protect it from would-be competitors such as Singapore Airlines, which would love to compete on valuable trans-Pacific routes. In an attempt to allay such fears, Mr Dixon assured viewers of Thursday night's 7:30 Report that the travelling public would not see any difference in Qantas service. And to his great credit, he also pledged on Thursday to place his personal windfall from the sale, which could amount to $60 million, into a charitable trust.
While The Australian is a strong supporter of the principle of private ownership and minimal government interference in the markets, we also believe markets do not exist in a moral or financial vacuum. Rather, they exist to see the economy's benefits flow to the maximum number of people in the most efficient way. The great moral defence of capitalism is that it is the most efficient way of producing wealth that benefits the greatest number of people. But the present enthusiasm for private equity takeovers of public companies seems to have flipped this idea on its back. The great industrialists of last century who built Qantas, to say nothing of men like Henry Ford, all made their fortunes by taking risks in the marketplace to build companies that provided new goods and services. Today's private equity mavens deliberately avoid both risk and market scrutiny. All of this sets a tough challenge for the regulators. Peter Costello has not tipped his hand, saying only that although the deal meets foreign ownership requirements he will still apply a national interest test to the sale. This deal means it may be time to have a broader conversation about the role such transactions play in our economy.
merry christmas
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WE all know that Pegasus,Eden and Guardian are the faaa …Are you going to deny here and now that you are not one of the elected officials of the FAAA .
Well ,Pegasus read these posts again….
“I have never heard any of our FAAA officials say that they know everything.” …..
“Firstly, roamingwolf, even though your comments in relation to "the faaa knows everything and has thought of everything" is sarcastic, nevertheless it's true.”
“don't feel disappointed that others in the FAAA know more than you or others on this forum.... for pete's sake that is why they are employed and elected!!”
“Also as Pegasus747 indicated earlier at many of the FAAA meetings the meeting with Maquarie bank was also relayed to the members”…This was from Guardian1.
“also the Macquarie Bank meeting occurred 3 months ago.”
I guess now you are going to tell us here on pprune that the FAAA has never had talks with the Mac Bank….
Honestly…….. you guys are a joke.
It does not worry me in the slightest to stir up the joke that is the FAAA leadership because as roamingwolf said
"I reckon these clowns could not find the floor if they fell out of bed."
Well ,Pegasus read these posts again….
“I have never heard any of our FAAA officials say that they know everything.” …..
“Firstly, roamingwolf, even though your comments in relation to "the faaa knows everything and has thought of everything" is sarcastic, nevertheless it's true.”
“don't feel disappointed that others in the FAAA know more than you or others on this forum.... for pete's sake that is why they are employed and elected!!”
“Also as Pegasus747 indicated earlier at many of the FAAA meetings the meeting with Maquarie bank was also relayed to the members”…This was from Guardian1.
“also the Macquarie Bank meeting occurred 3 months ago.”
I guess now you are going to tell us here on pprune that the FAAA has never had talks with the Mac Bank….
Honestly…….. you guys are a joke.
It does not worry me in the slightest to stir up the joke that is the FAAA leadership because as roamingwolf said
"I reckon these clowns could not find the floor if they fell out of bed."
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Top of Descent
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fin Review
Ants Nest??!!……..think poor lowerlobe walked into a minefield!!….shame that whenever a crew member raises some interesting points that the faaa supporters gang up using school bully boy tactics. Anyway time we all took a cold shower and re-focussed on our common enemy. And you can start by going out and purchasing the Weekend Financial Review and read the cover story by Jennifer Hewitt and James Hall “How to make Qantas soar”……..”with $11 billion on the table, the proposed new owners of Qantas are keen to accelerate CEO Geoff Dixons ambitious plans for the airline ---- behind closed doors”
Some key comments are -----
Having Bob Mansfield, the former Telstra Chairman, as the new public face of the Consortium to take over Qantas. He would be the ideal person to sell the deal as an Australian one. It was vital, after all, that their new man be trusted in Canberra, known by the public and reassuring to shareholders………it could’nt be anyone from Macquarie Bank, regarded as too dominant, too arrogant and too bloody rapacious……..and it
certainly could’nt be a representative of the “foreign barbarians”.
“Backing Dixons already radical plan for the airline while giving him a stronger mandate to implement it than he has ever had before. The nub of this strategy is to drive Qantas’s operating costs lower by rapidly expanding the budget offshoot, Jetstar, which has unit costs 30 percent to 40 percent lower than those of Qantas, while making each part of Qantas accountable for turning a profit from every dollar. Indeed, for all the sentimentality over Qantas. It will be Jetstar that will be the real pilot of the airline".
"Qantas staff can also expect to earn less on aggregate as a result . Dixon has made no secret of his dislike for pilots who earn in excess of $300,000 a year when their peers at Virgin Blue, and now Jetstar, earn about half that and work longer hours. Dixon will not try to sack these people, but he will undertake any expansion plans using his low cost option. Similarly cabin crew earning $60,000 a year on Qantas will find their role in any expansion plans limited as Jetstar pays its new international crew about $35,000 on Australian Workplace Agreements”
“On Thursday Dixon said he would place his long term incentives – likely to be worth $30-$60 million dollars – in a charitable trust. It was another very clever political move in terms of switching the focus away from an estimated $500 million in fees and shares and profits that so many people expect to make out of the deal. This gesture was only one example of the masterful spin that softened the public reaction to the announcement this week”
A very intersesting article indeed. I only wish the authors had mentioned the already obscene amount of money our executives swallow up. Instead of swallowing they’ll now be gagging on their ill gotten gains.
The spin doctors have been well & truly at work with this and their timing is impeccable, just before Christmas, with peoples minds on other things and the main radio & tv business news commentators on holiday. And they’re also using the same spin on the public as they have with the introduction of Jetstar International which in my opinion is a huge con on the Australian public, with it’s flood of advertising about it’s all about choice, choice to buy drinks, meals blankets etc when, as has been pointed out by others here, that you can fly full service airlines such as Thai & Singapore for around the same cost.
Ladies & gentlemen it’s going to be a very interesting 2007.
Some key comments are -----
Having Bob Mansfield, the former Telstra Chairman, as the new public face of the Consortium to take over Qantas. He would be the ideal person to sell the deal as an Australian one. It was vital, after all, that their new man be trusted in Canberra, known by the public and reassuring to shareholders………it could’nt be anyone from Macquarie Bank, regarded as too dominant, too arrogant and too bloody rapacious……..and it
certainly could’nt be a representative of the “foreign barbarians”.
“Backing Dixons already radical plan for the airline while giving him a stronger mandate to implement it than he has ever had before. The nub of this strategy is to drive Qantas’s operating costs lower by rapidly expanding the budget offshoot, Jetstar, which has unit costs 30 percent to 40 percent lower than those of Qantas, while making each part of Qantas accountable for turning a profit from every dollar. Indeed, for all the sentimentality over Qantas. It will be Jetstar that will be the real pilot of the airline".
"Qantas staff can also expect to earn less on aggregate as a result . Dixon has made no secret of his dislike for pilots who earn in excess of $300,000 a year when their peers at Virgin Blue, and now Jetstar, earn about half that and work longer hours. Dixon will not try to sack these people, but he will undertake any expansion plans using his low cost option. Similarly cabin crew earning $60,000 a year on Qantas will find their role in any expansion plans limited as Jetstar pays its new international crew about $35,000 on Australian Workplace Agreements”
“On Thursday Dixon said he would place his long term incentives – likely to be worth $30-$60 million dollars – in a charitable trust. It was another very clever political move in terms of switching the focus away from an estimated $500 million in fees and shares and profits that so many people expect to make out of the deal. This gesture was only one example of the masterful spin that softened the public reaction to the announcement this week”
A very intersesting article indeed. I only wish the authors had mentioned the already obscene amount of money our executives swallow up. Instead of swallowing they’ll now be gagging on their ill gotten gains.
The spin doctors have been well & truly at work with this and their timing is impeccable, just before Christmas, with peoples minds on other things and the main radio & tv business news commentators on holiday. And they’re also using the same spin on the public as they have with the introduction of Jetstar International which in my opinion is a huge con on the Australian public, with it’s flood of advertising about it’s all about choice, choice to buy drinks, meals blankets etc when, as has been pointed out by others here, that you can fly full service airlines such as Thai & Singapore for around the same cost.
Ladies & gentlemen it’s going to be a very interesting 2007.
Last edited by Shlonghaul; 17th Dec 2006 at 00:54.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: queensland
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Embarrasing!
After posting a constructive sugesstion I get a first response that its all too hard.Stubby your further response was appreciated.
This is followed by lowerlobe going straight into attack mode . and guess who he aimed at? No surprise, the officials of the FAAA once again. Ill give it to you you are a very good hater lowerlobe.
This is followed by Roaming wolf who has a shot over the bough in between laughs. None of this is a funny or laughing matter for anyone who has an inkling of what is occurring and what the ramifications will be. Roamingwolf contending with new draconian IR laws and a very dominant management is a walk in the park and something we should be looking forward to compared to what is about to occur to us under the new structure taking place before our eyes.
Your attack on the FAAA Roaming about who is laughing at who should be reconsidered following your closing remark about us all banding together with our shares to have a so called say.Once 90% of the shares have been purchased (which they will be - even without our shares) all remaining shares are compulsory to be sold. You will have no shares and there will be no using them to get a say.Who now is laughing at who - sheeeeesh!
You can however buy shares in the entity which will own Qantas.
Our only escape from this nightmare before Xmas is Costello and the forthcoming election.
So stop blaming the FAAA, that is wasting time we could all be writing to our members.
Those of you who criticise the FAAA have no idea, according to some on here, no matter what they do or what the Company does(ie now)it is always their fault."they should have seen it coming" "they should have done something different". Geez talk about crystal balls and hindsight. They are not professionals they are just doing the best job they can. Our officials have varying degrees of competence - past and present. They are having a go.
Our vocalising our ignorance on here by this continual childish union bashing is embarrasing.
After posting a constructive sugesstion I get a first response that its all too hard.Stubby your further response was appreciated.
This is followed by lowerlobe going straight into attack mode . and guess who he aimed at? No surprise, the officials of the FAAA once again. Ill give it to you you are a very good hater lowerlobe.
This is followed by Roaming wolf who has a shot over the bough in between laughs. None of this is a funny or laughing matter for anyone who has an inkling of what is occurring and what the ramifications will be. Roamingwolf contending with new draconian IR laws and a very dominant management is a walk in the park and something we should be looking forward to compared to what is about to occur to us under the new structure taking place before our eyes.
Your attack on the FAAA Roaming about who is laughing at who should be reconsidered following your closing remark about us all banding together with our shares to have a so called say.Once 90% of the shares have been purchased (which they will be - even without our shares) all remaining shares are compulsory to be sold. You will have no shares and there will be no using them to get a say.Who now is laughing at who - sheeeeesh!
You can however buy shares in the entity which will own Qantas.
Our only escape from this nightmare before Xmas is Costello and the forthcoming election.
So stop blaming the FAAA, that is wasting time we could all be writing to our members.
Those of you who criticise the FAAA have no idea, according to some on here, no matter what they do or what the Company does(ie now)it is always their fault."they should have seen it coming" "they should have done something different". Geez talk about crystal balls and hindsight. They are not professionals they are just doing the best job they can. Our officials have varying degrees of competence - past and present. They are having a go.
Our vocalising our ignorance on here by this continual childish union bashing is embarrasing.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hawkeye,
If you read my post again you will see that I said there were TWO problems not one....
ONE…Is the Takeover
TWO..Is the FAAA leadership...
If we are going to have any hope we need effective leadership and direction from our union and we are NOT getting that.Just ringing up our local member is not enough we need effective representation and I do not believe we are getting anywhere near that from MM and SR. it’s a foregone conclusion that Peg and Guard are the FAAA yet they continually pretend to be someone else as well as berating crew who have the temerity to suggest anything.
My post was not just an attack on the FAAA as you said, it also agreed with you that the takeover is probably a cataclysmic event in our jobs.Darth has always wanted to do things that were not palatable to the public image and now he has the chance and mandate with the company being delisted.
I have always said that we should have a media blitz and raise awareness of our side of the story now finally you are basically saying the same thing but letting the clowns in our union get away with their inept management will not help us in anyway.
By the way I am not a "hater" as you put it in fact I don't hate anyone but if I am going to pay for someone to represent me and my future I have a right to say what I think.
If you read my post again you will see that I said there were TWO problems not one....
ONE…Is the Takeover
TWO..Is the FAAA leadership...
If we are going to have any hope we need effective leadership and direction from our union and we are NOT getting that.Just ringing up our local member is not enough we need effective representation and I do not believe we are getting anywhere near that from MM and SR. it’s a foregone conclusion that Peg and Guard are the FAAA yet they continually pretend to be someone else as well as berating crew who have the temerity to suggest anything.
My post was not just an attack on the FAAA as you said, it also agreed with you that the takeover is probably a cataclysmic event in our jobs.Darth has always wanted to do things that were not palatable to the public image and now he has the chance and mandate with the company being delisted.
I have always said that we should have a media blitz and raise awareness of our side of the story now finally you are basically saying the same thing but letting the clowns in our union get away with their inept management will not help us in anyway.
By the way I am not a "hater" as you put it in fact I don't hate anyone but if I am going to pay for someone to represent me and my future I have a right to say what I think.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lowerlobe and roamingwolf are truly comic figures..... they speak with suck authority...... but alas, they have not got the slightest idea.
Why do you two bother with putting forward drivel??
Stick to the cartexchanges and allow others who understand the issues deal with them.
Talk about being out of their depth!
lowerlobe and roamongwolf discussing industrial matters and the proposed takeover of Qantas is like watching Humphrey bear pretending he understands the Theory of Relativity.
Ah well, it is the silly season after all i guess
And lowerlobe still won't say why he didn't have the guts to publicly criticise the FAAA leadership and direction at the recent FAAA meetings. A truly heroic figure he is !
Why do you two bother with putting forward drivel??
Stick to the cartexchanges and allow others who understand the issues deal with them.
Talk about being out of their depth!
lowerlobe and roamongwolf discussing industrial matters and the proposed takeover of Qantas is like watching Humphrey bear pretending he understands the Theory of Relativity.
Ah well, it is the silly season after all i guess
And lowerlobe still won't say why he didn't have the guts to publicly criticise the FAAA leadership and direction at the recent FAAA meetings. A truly heroic figure he is !
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I said we have a twofold problem and all you get from the FAAA is ridicule instead of constructive and decisive leadership.
Did they admit or deny that they are the FAAA?
Did they explain their statement that the FAAA knows everything and has thought of everything?
Did he explain why he was in meetings with the MAC bank 3 months ago or is that just more horse manure from the stables in Ewan St where the geldings are kept?
The meeting that I was at never mentioned any discussions with anyone let alone Mac Bank.
There was never any mention about pre or post reform EBa’s.
There was however a suggestion that the FAAA start a media campaign and which the people there said they would look at and nothing has happened.
I did not raise any issues because it seemed as though things were being managed efficiently and they were listening to the members but as usual it was just hollow rhetoric.
Yet time and again on pprune the FAAA spokesperson tells us that there are certain confidential initiatives that we don’t need to know about. I really wonder what these people are doing in the bunker.
Just when we face probably the biggest single threat and what do we get from the FAAA…. A newsletter threatening those who are not members to join and to vote Howard out. A 5 year old could have come up with that.
Guardian1…Are you one of the elected FAAA officials?
Pegasus747 …Are you one of the elected FAAA officials?
Explain why you said “ faaa knows everything and has thought of everything" is sarcastic, nevertheless it's true.”
As far as your post is concerned Guardian1 I think you summed up your ability with the phrase "suck authority"
Get over your ego and do your job that you profess to be so good at and listen to crew with ideas
Did they admit or deny that they are the FAAA?
Did they explain their statement that the FAAA knows everything and has thought of everything?
Did he explain why he was in meetings with the MAC bank 3 months ago or is that just more horse manure from the stables in Ewan St where the geldings are kept?
The meeting that I was at never mentioned any discussions with anyone let alone Mac Bank.
There was never any mention about pre or post reform EBa’s.
There was however a suggestion that the FAAA start a media campaign and which the people there said they would look at and nothing has happened.
I did not raise any issues because it seemed as though things were being managed efficiently and they were listening to the members but as usual it was just hollow rhetoric.
Yet time and again on pprune the FAAA spokesperson tells us that there are certain confidential initiatives that we don’t need to know about. I really wonder what these people are doing in the bunker.
Just when we face probably the biggest single threat and what do we get from the FAAA…. A newsletter threatening those who are not members to join and to vote Howard out. A 5 year old could have come up with that.
Guardian1…Are you one of the elected FAAA officials?
Pegasus747 …Are you one of the elected FAAA officials?
Explain why you said “ faaa knows everything and has thought of everything" is sarcastic, nevertheless it's true.”
As far as your post is concerned Guardian1 I think you summed up your ability with the phrase "suck authority"
Get over your ego and do your job that you profess to be so good at and listen to crew with ideas
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As was told to crew at the meetings, the Qantas Unions under auspices of the ACTU, (including pilots, flight attendants , engineers) met with the institutional investors of Qantas some months ago.
The purpose of the meeting was to assure the institutional investors that the combined Unions wanted a cooperative working relationship with Qantas management and that the collective approach had delivered qantas good results over the last years.
The acquisition of Qantas by private interests had not been made public at that stage and those institional investors (other than MAC BANK) will be divesting their interests in qantas to the private consortium.
There is little point in each union working separately and contacting the new potential owners. The combined Unions are working collectively and with the ACTU to communicate a joint position.
If it becomes necessary to have media activity etc, its better that the unions work together than individually, and that it what i believe is occuring.
That is the crux of the meetings with MAC Bank that occurred some time ago. When the meeting occured it was not widely publicised to any Qantas staff by any union. There was some comment on questioning at the most recent series of FAAA meetings however.
As far as taking the suggestions of crew...the FAAA offical are crew , they fly and communicate online every day and through the FAAA office. Those people to write the the FAAA and make suggestions are always replied to and acknowledged.
Given that the Qantas Unions work together closely and share a diverse range of ideas from a range of employees and highly qualified staff it would be rare that something that comes up in an anonymous and cantankerous site like pprune would not have already been considered or discussed.
To suggest that any Union let alone the FAAA would not listen to feedback is inconsistent with common sense. I would suggest that just as flight attendants and other employees let of steam in here, so to might some union officials.
The public and "not anonymous" position of the FAAA can be found by talking to the officials directly and in their newletters and other communications.
Whether Lowerlobe is actually Johanna Brem has been discussed by many but we will never know. Although many are convinced that the lowerlobe diatribe is straight out of the bavarian IR textbook from the past
The purpose of the meeting was to assure the institutional investors that the combined Unions wanted a cooperative working relationship with Qantas management and that the collective approach had delivered qantas good results over the last years.
The acquisition of Qantas by private interests had not been made public at that stage and those institional investors (other than MAC BANK) will be divesting their interests in qantas to the private consortium.
There is little point in each union working separately and contacting the new potential owners. The combined Unions are working collectively and with the ACTU to communicate a joint position.
If it becomes necessary to have media activity etc, its better that the unions work together than individually, and that it what i believe is occuring.
That is the crux of the meetings with MAC Bank that occurred some time ago. When the meeting occured it was not widely publicised to any Qantas staff by any union. There was some comment on questioning at the most recent series of FAAA meetings however.
As far as taking the suggestions of crew...the FAAA offical are crew , they fly and communicate online every day and through the FAAA office. Those people to write the the FAAA and make suggestions are always replied to and acknowledged.
Given that the Qantas Unions work together closely and share a diverse range of ideas from a range of employees and highly qualified staff it would be rare that something that comes up in an anonymous and cantankerous site like pprune would not have already been considered or discussed.
To suggest that any Union let alone the FAAA would not listen to feedback is inconsistent with common sense. I would suggest that just as flight attendants and other employees let of steam in here, so to might some union officials.
The public and "not anonymous" position of the FAAA can be found by talking to the officials directly and in their newletters and other communications.
Whether Lowerlobe is actually Johanna Brem has been discussed by many but we will never know. Although many are convinced that the lowerlobe diatribe is straight out of the bavarian IR textbook from the past
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gee,I go out for a couple or more quiet beers on a Sunday and when I come back I see hell has broken loose.
Lets not have any more personal bickering and start working together.The kids and my missus probablt wonder what the laughter coming out of the spare room when I'm on the computer is all about and a good blue now and again clears the air alright.
I reckon if lowerlobe is johanna then that must make me either TW or GB. I'll have to look in the mirror again and see who I look like.
at the start I did not mean to stop the takeover but just that I read the pilots were trying to see if they could get enough shares to get a seat.As I said business economics are like normison to me and thats why I asked the question.But if anyone asks another question or has an idea lets not break out the boxing gloves again.
I intend to phone my local federal member tomorro ,how about posting the results of these calls here on pprune and maybe even give the polies the website for pprune to show them some of the feelings.
Lets not have any more personal bickering and start working together.The kids and my missus probablt wonder what the laughter coming out of the spare room when I'm on the computer is all about and a good blue now and again clears the air alright.
I reckon if lowerlobe is johanna then that must make me either TW or GB. I'll have to look in the mirror again and see who I look like.
at the start I did not mean to stop the takeover but just that I read the pilots were trying to see if they could get enough shares to get a seat.As I said business economics are like normison to me and thats why I asked the question.But if anyone asks another question or has an idea lets not break out the boxing gloves again.
I intend to phone my local federal member tomorro ,how about posting the results of these calls here on pprune and maybe even give the polies the website for pprune to show them some of the feelings.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Todays Australian has an article that the pilots are trying to raise enough money to buy a block of shares..
If this is right I reckon we should have a look at it and see if we can join them.it look like they have a different legal opinion to the faaa.
If this is right I reckon we should have a look at it and see if we can join them.it look like they have a different legal opinion to the faaa.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is enormous risk in buying shares now. The current price is $5.29. If Unions talked their members into buying shares and potentially mortguaging thier home etc to buy shares to potentially stop a takeover, then inevitably the share price would plummet if the deal went through. Leading to massive losses for staff.
The private consortium is not interested in staff raising enough capital for a seat at their table as a partner in the buyout. The whole idea is to drive down staff costs and that would be inconsistent with having a staff member on the new board.
[B]"QANTAS unions meet tomorrow to forge a united front amid growing concerns the Macquarie Bank consortium's $11 billion takeover of the national airline will mean job losses.
Almost a dozen unions representing workers, including those covering pilots, flight attendants, engineers and baggage handlers, will meet on a teleconference to discuss their strategy amid growing uncertainty among Qantas's 35,000-strong workforce.
The Australian Workers Union's secretary, Bill Shorten, said the market valued the deal at less than the $11.1 billion price tag to be paid by the Airline Partners Australia private equity consortium. But he said it remained unclear how the private equity players, led by Macquarie Bank and Texas Pacific Group, would seek to generate returns.
"There is lack of detail … the case for this private equity deal is not clear," Mr Shorten said yesterday. "We want them to tell us what it means for jobs, what it means for regional air routes and what it means for consumers."
Unions have had little joy in their attempts to talk to Qantas's proposed new owners. Mr Shorten described informal talks with the consortium as "tightlipped" and the Australian and International Pilots Association attempted last week to talk to the consortium but is still waiting for a reply.
"This sort of deal is not going to be good news. Private equity is there for a reason - the history of these things is that employees tend to be burned," the association's general manager, Peter Somerville, said yesterday.
Unions have had combative relationships with Qantas management as chief executive Geoff Dixon and his team have sought to vigorously rein in costs.
Tomorrow's meeting, organised by the ACTU, marks the latest development in attempts to foster cross-union co-operation in dealings with Qantas, amid heightened fears of further pressure on wages as a result of the deal.
Mr Shorten stopped short of suggesting the unions might resort to industrial unrest but he admitted "there is a lot of water to go under this deal yet".
Shares in Qantas closed up 1c at $5.29 on Friday, still almost 6 per cent less than the consortium's offer price of $5.60."
The private consortium is not interested in staff raising enough capital for a seat at their table as a partner in the buyout. The whole idea is to drive down staff costs and that would be inconsistent with having a staff member on the new board.
[B]"QANTAS unions meet tomorrow to forge a united front amid growing concerns the Macquarie Bank consortium's $11 billion takeover of the national airline will mean job losses.
Almost a dozen unions representing workers, including those covering pilots, flight attendants, engineers and baggage handlers, will meet on a teleconference to discuss their strategy amid growing uncertainty among Qantas's 35,000-strong workforce.
The Australian Workers Union's secretary, Bill Shorten, said the market valued the deal at less than the $11.1 billion price tag to be paid by the Airline Partners Australia private equity consortium. But he said it remained unclear how the private equity players, led by Macquarie Bank and Texas Pacific Group, would seek to generate returns.
"There is lack of detail … the case for this private equity deal is not clear," Mr Shorten said yesterday. "We want them to tell us what it means for jobs, what it means for regional air routes and what it means for consumers."
Unions have had little joy in their attempts to talk to Qantas's proposed new owners. Mr Shorten described informal talks with the consortium as "tightlipped" and the Australian and International Pilots Association attempted last week to talk to the consortium but is still waiting for a reply.
"This sort of deal is not going to be good news. Private equity is there for a reason - the history of these things is that employees tend to be burned," the association's general manager, Peter Somerville, said yesterday.
Unions have had combative relationships with Qantas management as chief executive Geoff Dixon and his team have sought to vigorously rein in costs.
Tomorrow's meeting, organised by the ACTU, marks the latest development in attempts to foster cross-union co-operation in dealings with Qantas, amid heightened fears of further pressure on wages as a result of the deal.
Mr Shorten stopped short of suggesting the unions might resort to industrial unrest but he admitted "there is a lot of water to go under this deal yet".
Shares in Qantas closed up 1c at $5.29 on Friday, still almost 6 per cent less than the consortium's offer price of $5.60."
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
typo in my previous post..... if the deal does not go through then the share price "would" plumment..... Thus the danger of buying shares at inflated prices as a result of buyout speculation
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: queensland
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roaming wolf & Lower lobe,
Do you really think cabin crew are going to put their tight fisted hands in their pockets to buy Qantas shares? Currently many crew have no clue as to the dire situation we are facing.
Even if they did there is no guarantee that there would be enough supporters of such an idea they would contribute and purchase shares. If not enough purchase shares then we do not achieve the 10 % required to block the sale then the effort used on organising that agenda has wasted valuable time that could be used to combat the sale by other means ie raising public awareness, opinion and support. If you do raise the 10% required meaning everyone has purchased shares at $5.00 plus whatwould those shares then be worth? If the sale is blocked the share price will drop.
My guess is the share price would fall dramatically. Its a nice pie in the sky idea filled with alot of ifs and plenty of pitfalls.
The main pitfall is getting cabin crew who were screaming at the loss of earnings due to forced LSL or the scream we hear when union fees are raised in getting them to contribute.
There is a shortage of Pilots around the world so in one form or other there futures have some security. Bearing that in mind I dont think pilots would support it.Unfortunately that is not the case with us.
Its good to come forth with ideas guys but keep em real and keep em coming. Oh lowerlobe , great restraint shown by submitting a post without bashing the FAAA.keep it up. You might start to get taken seriously
Do you really think cabin crew are going to put their tight fisted hands in their pockets to buy Qantas shares? Currently many crew have no clue as to the dire situation we are facing.
Even if they did there is no guarantee that there would be enough supporters of such an idea they would contribute and purchase shares. If not enough purchase shares then we do not achieve the 10 % required to block the sale then the effort used on organising that agenda has wasted valuable time that could be used to combat the sale by other means ie raising public awareness, opinion and support. If you do raise the 10% required meaning everyone has purchased shares at $5.00 plus whatwould those shares then be worth? If the sale is blocked the share price will drop.
My guess is the share price would fall dramatically. Its a nice pie in the sky idea filled with alot of ifs and plenty of pitfalls.
The main pitfall is getting cabin crew who were screaming at the loss of earnings due to forced LSL or the scream we hear when union fees are raised in getting them to contribute.
There is a shortage of Pilots around the world so in one form or other there futures have some security. Bearing that in mind I dont think pilots would support it.Unfortunately that is not the case with us.
Its good to come forth with ideas guys but keep em real and keep em coming. Oh lowerlobe , great restraint shown by submitting a post without bashing the FAAA.keep it up. You might start to get taken seriously
Incurable Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Nr ABX (NSW)
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Outside Looking In
Quoting ROAMINGWOLF "Lets not have any more personal bickering and start working together."
Never a truer word has been spoken,as a person who does not work in the industry but has flown Qantas 47 times this year I have to say that personal attacks on each other will do nothing to help solve the issues associated with the takeover.
There has never been a greater need for all Qantas staff,union or not to put aside disagreements and show a united front,obviously it is not for me to say that this will have any effect on what happens re job losses etc but having worked for many years in the corporate world I know that negotiating as a professional,united group will always command greater respect than a disorganised rabble(not that I suggesting that is what is happening now).
Despite having misgivings about the way this has been handled I have a lot of respect for the business acumen of people like Peter Yates (head of Allco and the man Kerry Packer brought in to sort out the One Tel mess) and I believe that he is the sort of man who will talk openly and frankly about plans to sell off Qantas business units and will deal honestly with unions, Many may feel I am being naive on this point but I believe in the aussie tradition of giving a bloke a fair go,lets see what happens.
And yes, I know that I speak from outside and my livelihood is not at stake,I understand how some of you must be feeling,but please don't let this stop you from having a merry christmas and presenting a strong,united and as always has been the case,professional group of Qantas employees.I know you can do it.work together.
Never a truer word has been spoken,as a person who does not work in the industry but has flown Qantas 47 times this year I have to say that personal attacks on each other will do nothing to help solve the issues associated with the takeover.
There has never been a greater need for all Qantas staff,union or not to put aside disagreements and show a united front,obviously it is not for me to say that this will have any effect on what happens re job losses etc but having worked for many years in the corporate world I know that negotiating as a professional,united group will always command greater respect than a disorganised rabble(not that I suggesting that is what is happening now).
Despite having misgivings about the way this has been handled I have a lot of respect for the business acumen of people like Peter Yates (head of Allco and the man Kerry Packer brought in to sort out the One Tel mess) and I believe that he is the sort of man who will talk openly and frankly about plans to sell off Qantas business units and will deal honestly with unions, Many may feel I am being naive on this point but I believe in the aussie tradition of giving a bloke a fair go,lets see what happens.
And yes, I know that I speak from outside and my livelihood is not at stake,I understand how some of you must be feeling,but please don't let this stop you from having a merry christmas and presenting a strong,united and as always has been the case,professional group of Qantas employees.I know you can do it.work together.
Last edited by NIGELINOZ; 18th Dec 2006 at 03:51. Reason: Spelling