QANTAS - Australia II
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pegasus,
Thanks mate for your post but it would be good if you could also give us some idea of our super.Sorry mate but I realise that you are not one of the faaa guys (wink wink) but we need some info on how safe our super is.
In pprune speak what you said was that the faaa went to the company to see if they would talk but it looks like they gave you guys the cold shoulder.So now the faaa is saying they were only seeing what the water was like and really did not want to go for a swim anyway unless the waves were beaut.
So now you reckon all we can do is to sit back and watch unless the libs get voted out and GD might want to have a beer and a chat
Thanks mate for your post but it would be good if you could also give us some idea of our super.Sorry mate but I realise that you are not one of the faaa guys (wink wink) but we need some info on how safe our super is.
In pprune speak what you said was that the faaa went to the company to see if they would talk but it looks like they gave you guys the cold shoulder.So now the faaa is saying they were only seeing what the water was like and really did not want to go for a swim anyway unless the waves were beaut.
So now you reckon all we can do is to sit back and watch unless the libs get voted out and GD might want to have a beer and a chat
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When talking to a trustee of the super fund some months ago, i was left with no doubt that our super is fully funded and the company cannot get its hands on it becuase of the trust deed and they way its managed and funded.
there is some talk of an amount of money that they could get their hands on but the trustees i am sure will be doing what they can to block that avenue if possible, but even so it appears it would not affect whats on your current statements,
At the recent FAAA meetings it was made clear that the FAAA have not approached the company to terminate the current EBA early not have they asked them to start early negotiation. conversely, the company has not indicated formally that they are even interested in an EBA 8 even when the current one expires.
What the FAAA has been talking about at its meetings is a range of strategies designed to maximise our chances of getting another EBA as opposed to the other more draconion options available under work choices.
It would indeed in my view be a very good thing if Qantas indicated a desire to commence discussions on EBA8 at any stage . The alternatives under workchoices legislation would be catastrophic for crew ...have no doubt.
I see little point though for those in here that care about these issues to work yourselves into a lather at this stage. Much of it is completely out of our control and we must play a certain amount of the waiting game.
there is some talk of an amount of money that they could get their hands on but the trustees i am sure will be doing what they can to block that avenue if possible, but even so it appears it would not affect whats on your current statements,
At the recent FAAA meetings it was made clear that the FAAA have not approached the company to terminate the current EBA early not have they asked them to start early negotiation. conversely, the company has not indicated formally that they are even interested in an EBA 8 even when the current one expires.
What the FAAA has been talking about at its meetings is a range of strategies designed to maximise our chances of getting another EBA as opposed to the other more draconion options available under work choices.
It would indeed in my view be a very good thing if Qantas indicated a desire to commence discussions on EBA8 at any stage . The alternatives under workchoices legislation would be catastrophic for crew ...have no doubt.
I see little point though for those in here that care about these issues to work yourselves into a lather at this stage. Much of it is completely out of our control and we must play a certain amount of the waiting game.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne, oz
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lowerlobe,
I can only partially agree with you.
There were 5 Ansett superannuation plans.
The Ansett Australia Super Plan,
The Flight Attendant benefits scheme,
The Ansett Australia Pilot's Accumulation Plan,
The Ansett Australia Flight Engineers Plan ,
The Ansett Australia Pilot's/management Plan.
The first 4 were all paid out . The pilot's/management fund did experience problems , concerning the issues which you have pointed out - but these have been resolved and all members paid their full outstanding superannuation benefits. The plan will be formally closed in the very near future. ( if it hasn't been already-it takes quite a bit of time to deregister companies etc.)
This information has been on the Ansett Australia employees website for quite some time now.
I can only partially agree with you.
There were 5 Ansett superannuation plans.
The Ansett Australia Super Plan,
The Flight Attendant benefits scheme,
The Ansett Australia Pilot's Accumulation Plan,
The Ansett Australia Flight Engineers Plan ,
The Ansett Australia Pilot's/management Plan.
The first 4 were all paid out . The pilot's/management fund did experience problems , concerning the issues which you have pointed out - but these have been resolved and all members paid their full outstanding superannuation benefits. The plan will be formally closed in the very near future. ( if it hasn't been already-it takes quite a bit of time to deregister companies etc.)
This information has been on the Ansett Australia employees website for quite some time now.
Last edited by priapism; 19th Dec 2006 at 21:48.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roamingwolf are you obsessed?
You are very scary Roaming wolf.
Firstly you take your username from a post I made.
You constantly quote posts I made long ago and out of context.
You use comments I made previously when lowerlobe was sending me offensive PM's as your own comments about my PM's.
I have answered your questions regarding local nights, thus exposing yours, and many others here, lack of knowledge of our EBA terms and conditions.
Why do you respond with something like "NFI" when I offer my explanation?
It seems that one of your main purposes contributing on here is to monitor my posts and try to ridicule me.
In your public profile you still list your interests as "roaming forests looking for twiggs"
??????????????
Firstly you take your username from a post I made.
You constantly quote posts I made long ago and out of context.
You use comments I made previously when lowerlobe was sending me offensive PM's as your own comments about my PM's.
I have answered your questions regarding local nights, thus exposing yours, and many others here, lack of knowledge of our EBA terms and conditions.
Why do you respond with something like "NFI" when I offer my explanation?
It seems that one of your main purposes contributing on here is to monitor my posts and try to ridicule me.
In your public profile you still list your interests as "roaming forests looking for twiggs"
??????????????
Last edited by twiggs; 20th Dec 2006 at 01:11. Reason: grammar
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Priapism,
If the super was fully funded then the trustees would not have had to take the issue to court to recoup funds.
The company under Australian law was supposed to have made their company contributions and usually did so on a monthly basis however were in arrears at the time of the collapse.
We all know how long court cases can be dragged out and in particular this one was stared in 2002 and only concluded in 2004 so I don’t know how you can describe that it was concluded quickly.
In addition there was the proviso that if the trustees agreed to a lesser amount the administrators would also agree so long as they did not pursue the matter.
So some employees received less super than they were entitled and their payout had to be adjusted. This was the part that I referred to as a travesty.
If the super was fully funded then the trustees would not have had to take the issue to court to recoup funds.
The company under Australian law was supposed to have made their company contributions and usually did so on a monthly basis however were in arrears at the time of the collapse.
We all know how long court cases can be dragged out and in particular this one was stared in 2002 and only concluded in 2004 so I don’t know how you can describe that it was concluded quickly.
In addition there was the proviso that if the trustees agreed to a lesser amount the administrators would also agree so long as they did not pursue the matter.
So some employees received less super than they were entitled and their payout had to be adjusted. This was the part that I referred to as a travesty.
Last edited by lowerlobe; 20th Dec 2006 at 02:56.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get a Life
Pegasus,
Thanks mate for your reply and as I thought we can only sit back and wait. I just would like the next election to be now because I have not found a soul who wants the libs back in.
Has anyone else got any ideas ?
Twiggs,
I know you have read my answer to you and I reckon there is no need for it anylonger so I have deleted it.
Thanks mate for your reply and as I thought we can only sit back and wait. I just would like the next election to be now because I have not found a soul who wants the libs back in.
Has anyone else got any ideas ?
Twiggs,
I know you have read my answer to you and I reckon there is no need for it anylonger so I have deleted it.
Last edited by roamingwolf; 20th Dec 2006 at 04:36.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Empire Strikes Back
The following media release has just been distributed.
QANTAS CEO RESPONDS TO MISLEADING REPORTS
The Chief Executive Officer of Qantas Airways, Mr Geoff Dixon, said
today that much of the speculation and comment surrounding the proposed
takeover of Qantas was wrong and, in some cases, deliberately
misleading.
Mr Dixon said that any proposed ownership change for Qantas needed
informed debate and needed to take into account the market in which
Qantas operated.
“The international aviation market is grossly distorted by government
ownership and financial support for airlines and airports.
“In this context, Qantas is one of the least protected airlines in the
world and it is fanciful in the extreme to suggest otherwise.
“It is also laughable to see some editorial writers and commentators, in
particular, calling for more competition for Qantas from city states and
countries that skew all their aviation assets for national purposes,” he
said.
Mr Dixon said many of those making near hysterical statements now were
the same people who had opposed just about every change Qantas had made
since privatisation 11 years ago.
“They are, of course, supported by the usual gaggle of monopoly airport
providers in Australia and the government owned and supported carriers
such as Singapore Airlines.
“If Qantas had not fought for its position against such blatant self
interest and if we had not changed work practices, attacked
inefficiencies and invested billions of dollars on product and service,
we would be a much diminished airline now and Australia would be much
the poorer for it,” he said.
Mr Dixon said Qantas had for many years and, increasingly so since its
privatisation, maintained a “social compact” with the Australian
community.
This had, among many things, involved:
Qantas and government working together to achieve balanced outcomes
for Australia in the regulatory system that provided market access
for airlines worldwide;
Qantas making significant compromises in restructuring its various
businesses to keep jobs in Australia;
Qantas providing extensive financial, operational and people
resources in times of crisis, from Cyclone Tracy some 32 years ago to
the collapse of Ansett, the Bali bombings and the Asian tsunami in
more recent times; and
Qantas support, year in and year out, for large and small charitable,
cultural and sporting organisations.
Mr Dixon said this sense of responsibility to Australia was a core part
of Qantas’ DNA and would not change under what would remain majority
Australian ownership if the bid for Qantas by Airline Partners Australia
was successful.
“We acknowledge that Qantas’ iconic status means people, in particular
legislators and regulators in Canberra, have a genuine interest in the
leadership and future of the company.
“This genuine interest should not be overshadowed by the noise from the
self-interested and ill-informed,” he said.
Mr Dixon said it was important to put some facts on record about the
misleading speculation on the following issues:
Qantas Remaining Australian
“Airline Partners Australia’s proposal would see Qantas continuing to be
Australia-based, majority owned and effectively controlled by
Australians,” Mr Dixon said.
“It will continue to be Australia’s national carrier and one of the
primary ambassadors for the country overseas. It is completely wrong to
suggest that would change.”
Open Skies
Mr Dixon said the call for Open Skies by Brisbane and Melbourne Airports
and certain government owned and supported competitors was breathtaking
in its hypocrisy. It ignored the realities of the situation, namely:
The most protected and privileged positions in Australian aviation
are held by the unregulated monopoly airports that have increased
charges by between 50 per cent and 228 per cent over the past six
years.
As revealed in the Productivity Commission’s recent review of price
regulation of airport services, charges in Brisbane in 2005 exceeded
those of airports such as Bangkok, Singapore, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur
and Dubai where Qantas’ major international hub-based competitors
reside.
Since 2000, the Qantas Group has increased international seats
departing from Brisbane by 73 per cent and from Melbourne by 24 per
cent.
The aviation policy settings that the Australian Government announced
in February this year, including the decision to not allow Singapore
Airlines access to the trans-Pacific route, weighed the interests of
consumers, exporters, tourism stakeholders and foreign airlines and
the economic and strategic benefits flowing from an Australia-based
aviation industry.
Australia is already one of the most liberalised aviation markets in
the world, with 43 international carriers flying in and out each
week.
All United States airlines can seek to operate on the trans-Pacific
route. Four airlines are expected to be providing direct services
between Australia and the US within two years and four more already
providing one-stop services – hardly the protected route that some
people like to suggest.
Open Skies is a distant goal in an industry that continues to operate
under a bilateral air rights system, and Australia cannot
unilaterally establish global open skies.
Qantas is not allowed to fly on many routes including Shanghai-London
and New York-London. It is capacity constrained on many more routes,
including Singapore-Paris, and Hong Kong-London.
“Rather than blaming Qantas for the shortcomings of their airports,
Brisbane and Melbourne Airports would be better placed to attract
customers by offering more attractive prices and improving their current
service standards,” Mr Dixon said.
Sydney Airport
Mr Dixon said the suggestion that Qantas might get favourable treatment
from Sydney Airport due to the less than 15 per cent equity stake
Macquarie Bank would hold in Qantas under APA’s proposal was wrong.
“From our experience the owners of Sydney Airport, including various
Macquarie infrastructure funds, are solely interested in the performance
of the Airport and not its major client, Qantas. This will not change
due to Macquarie Bank’s limited interest in Qantas,” he said.
“This position is very different to that of our hub-based competitors in
Singapore, Dubai, Bangkok and Kuala Lumpur where the Government owns
both the Airport and the Airline.
“Our approach to dealing with the unregulated monopoly airports,
including Sydney Airport, will not change as a result of the proposed
transaction. Sydney Airport is currently seeking special leave to appeal
to the High Court to overturn the declaration of domestic aeronautical
services under Part iiiA of the Trade Practices Act. Qantas will again
vigorously argue that Sydney Airport should be declared at the High
Court.”
Restructuring
Mr Dixon said Qantas could not stand still as competitors around the
globe aggressively restructured their businesses.
“United States legacy carriers are transforming their cost structures
under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, consolidation is also occurring
at pace in the United States, Europe and parts of Asia, and many hub
airlines enjoy the benefits of direct and indirect government support,
including common ownership of airlines and airports,” he said.
“We do not have some of the structural advantages that our competitors
do, so we must continually reinvigorate our business within our
regulatory and policy framework to ensure we remain competitive.
“Change has always been – and will continue to be – critical to Qantas’
success.
“Our track record of outstanding customer service, investment and growth
speaks for itself.”
Frequent Flyer Program
“The Frequent Flyer Program is a strong, viable program prized by our
most valuable customers and a critical contributor to the company’s
success,” Mr Dixon said.
“Some people are trying to draw a parallel between a change of ownership
of Qantas and Ansett’s collapse. That is wrong – we are not broke and
we will not go broke.
“We will not take people’s points away from them. It is in our
interests to make sure the Program is as strong as it can be.
“Like any area of our business, we will continue to review the program
to make sure it is providing benefits that our customers want and
operating well for us – that is no different to what we have done for
many years.”
Full Service
“Our full service operations, under the Qantas brand, are a key driver
of the Group’s profitability, with excellent positions in the domestic
market and in key international markets,” Mr Dixon said.
“As we have stated repeatedly, our two-brand strategy is about ensuring
a strong future for our full service brand, while adding a value-based
airline that is better suited to some markets.
“Qantas is one of the world’s leading premium carriers, ranked number
two globally for customer service for the past two years in the
benchmark Skytrax customer survey. We have achieved this because we
have continued to invest in the business through one of the more
turbulent periods in aviation history.”
Regional Services
“Our extensive regional network, operated by QantasLink, provides an
important competitive advantage for the Group,” Mr Dixon said.
“QantasLink has invested in new, larger aircraft, providing a 17.5 per
cent increase in capacity last year with further growth this year.
“We are committed to regional Australia.”
Jetstar
“Jetstar is the only value-based model established by a full service
airline to have reported profits for two straight years since start-up.
Last month, it became the first long haul international value-based
airline,” Mr Dixon said.
“We are aggressively expanding Jetstar to provide profitable growth in
markets that are not economic with the Qantas product and cost
structure.”
Engineering
“We have undertaken an extensive review of our engineering operations
over the past year, with the aim of achieving globally competitive costs
and efficiency,” Mr Dixon said.
“Rather than take the easy option of moving large parts of our
maintenance activities offshore, we are well advanced on strategies to
restructure our wide-body and narrow-body heavy maintenance operations
within Australia and have already moved closer to world best practice
efficiency.
“This maintains a skilled jobs in Australia.
“If we get this right, we will have the opportunity to bring
maintenance of aircraft that are now offshore back onshore.”
Defence
Qantas’ commitment to ongoing cooperation and support (when requested)
to the Australian Defence Forces is total, ongoing, and always will be.
QANTAS CEO RESPONDS TO MISLEADING REPORTS
The Chief Executive Officer of Qantas Airways, Mr Geoff Dixon, said
today that much of the speculation and comment surrounding the proposed
takeover of Qantas was wrong and, in some cases, deliberately
misleading.
Mr Dixon said that any proposed ownership change for Qantas needed
informed debate and needed to take into account the market in which
Qantas operated.
“The international aviation market is grossly distorted by government
ownership and financial support for airlines and airports.
“In this context, Qantas is one of the least protected airlines in the
world and it is fanciful in the extreme to suggest otherwise.
“It is also laughable to see some editorial writers and commentators, in
particular, calling for more competition for Qantas from city states and
countries that skew all their aviation assets for national purposes,” he
said.
Mr Dixon said many of those making near hysterical statements now were
the same people who had opposed just about every change Qantas had made
since privatisation 11 years ago.
“They are, of course, supported by the usual gaggle of monopoly airport
providers in Australia and the government owned and supported carriers
such as Singapore Airlines.
“If Qantas had not fought for its position against such blatant self
interest and if we had not changed work practices, attacked
inefficiencies and invested billions of dollars on product and service,
we would be a much diminished airline now and Australia would be much
the poorer for it,” he said.
Mr Dixon said Qantas had for many years and, increasingly so since its
privatisation, maintained a “social compact” with the Australian
community.
This had, among many things, involved:
Qantas and government working together to achieve balanced outcomes
for Australia in the regulatory system that provided market access
for airlines worldwide;
Qantas making significant compromises in restructuring its various
businesses to keep jobs in Australia;
Qantas providing extensive financial, operational and people
resources in times of crisis, from Cyclone Tracy some 32 years ago to
the collapse of Ansett, the Bali bombings and the Asian tsunami in
more recent times; and
Qantas support, year in and year out, for large and small charitable,
cultural and sporting organisations.
Mr Dixon said this sense of responsibility to Australia was a core part
of Qantas’ DNA and would not change under what would remain majority
Australian ownership if the bid for Qantas by Airline Partners Australia
was successful.
“We acknowledge that Qantas’ iconic status means people, in particular
legislators and regulators in Canberra, have a genuine interest in the
leadership and future of the company.
“This genuine interest should not be overshadowed by the noise from the
self-interested and ill-informed,” he said.
Mr Dixon said it was important to put some facts on record about the
misleading speculation on the following issues:
Qantas Remaining Australian
“Airline Partners Australia’s proposal would see Qantas continuing to be
Australia-based, majority owned and effectively controlled by
Australians,” Mr Dixon said.
“It will continue to be Australia’s national carrier and one of the
primary ambassadors for the country overseas. It is completely wrong to
suggest that would change.”
Open Skies
Mr Dixon said the call for Open Skies by Brisbane and Melbourne Airports
and certain government owned and supported competitors was breathtaking
in its hypocrisy. It ignored the realities of the situation, namely:
The most protected and privileged positions in Australian aviation
are held by the unregulated monopoly airports that have increased
charges by between 50 per cent and 228 per cent over the past six
years.
As revealed in the Productivity Commission’s recent review of price
regulation of airport services, charges in Brisbane in 2005 exceeded
those of airports such as Bangkok, Singapore, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur
and Dubai where Qantas’ major international hub-based competitors
reside.
Since 2000, the Qantas Group has increased international seats
departing from Brisbane by 73 per cent and from Melbourne by 24 per
cent.
The aviation policy settings that the Australian Government announced
in February this year, including the decision to not allow Singapore
Airlines access to the trans-Pacific route, weighed the interests of
consumers, exporters, tourism stakeholders and foreign airlines and
the economic and strategic benefits flowing from an Australia-based
aviation industry.
Australia is already one of the most liberalised aviation markets in
the world, with 43 international carriers flying in and out each
week.
All United States airlines can seek to operate on the trans-Pacific
route. Four airlines are expected to be providing direct services
between Australia and the US within two years and four more already
providing one-stop services – hardly the protected route that some
people like to suggest.
Open Skies is a distant goal in an industry that continues to operate
under a bilateral air rights system, and Australia cannot
unilaterally establish global open skies.
Qantas is not allowed to fly on many routes including Shanghai-London
and New York-London. It is capacity constrained on many more routes,
including Singapore-Paris, and Hong Kong-London.
“Rather than blaming Qantas for the shortcomings of their airports,
Brisbane and Melbourne Airports would be better placed to attract
customers by offering more attractive prices and improving their current
service standards,” Mr Dixon said.
Sydney Airport
Mr Dixon said the suggestion that Qantas might get favourable treatment
from Sydney Airport due to the less than 15 per cent equity stake
Macquarie Bank would hold in Qantas under APA’s proposal was wrong.
“From our experience the owners of Sydney Airport, including various
Macquarie infrastructure funds, are solely interested in the performance
of the Airport and not its major client, Qantas. This will not change
due to Macquarie Bank’s limited interest in Qantas,” he said.
“This position is very different to that of our hub-based competitors in
Singapore, Dubai, Bangkok and Kuala Lumpur where the Government owns
both the Airport and the Airline.
“Our approach to dealing with the unregulated monopoly airports,
including Sydney Airport, will not change as a result of the proposed
transaction. Sydney Airport is currently seeking special leave to appeal
to the High Court to overturn the declaration of domestic aeronautical
services under Part iiiA of the Trade Practices Act. Qantas will again
vigorously argue that Sydney Airport should be declared at the High
Court.”
Restructuring
Mr Dixon said Qantas could not stand still as competitors around the
globe aggressively restructured their businesses.
“United States legacy carriers are transforming their cost structures
under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, consolidation is also occurring
at pace in the United States, Europe and parts of Asia, and many hub
airlines enjoy the benefits of direct and indirect government support,
including common ownership of airlines and airports,” he said.
“We do not have some of the structural advantages that our competitors
do, so we must continually reinvigorate our business within our
regulatory and policy framework to ensure we remain competitive.
“Change has always been – and will continue to be – critical to Qantas’
success.
“Our track record of outstanding customer service, investment and growth
speaks for itself.”
Frequent Flyer Program
“The Frequent Flyer Program is a strong, viable program prized by our
most valuable customers and a critical contributor to the company’s
success,” Mr Dixon said.
“Some people are trying to draw a parallel between a change of ownership
of Qantas and Ansett’s collapse. That is wrong – we are not broke and
we will not go broke.
“We will not take people’s points away from them. It is in our
interests to make sure the Program is as strong as it can be.
“Like any area of our business, we will continue to review the program
to make sure it is providing benefits that our customers want and
operating well for us – that is no different to what we have done for
many years.”
Full Service
“Our full service operations, under the Qantas brand, are a key driver
of the Group’s profitability, with excellent positions in the domestic
market and in key international markets,” Mr Dixon said.
“As we have stated repeatedly, our two-brand strategy is about ensuring
a strong future for our full service brand, while adding a value-based
airline that is better suited to some markets.
“Qantas is one of the world’s leading premium carriers, ranked number
two globally for customer service for the past two years in the
benchmark Skytrax customer survey. We have achieved this because we
have continued to invest in the business through one of the more
turbulent periods in aviation history.”
Regional Services
“Our extensive regional network, operated by QantasLink, provides an
important competitive advantage for the Group,” Mr Dixon said.
“QantasLink has invested in new, larger aircraft, providing a 17.5 per
cent increase in capacity last year with further growth this year.
“We are committed to regional Australia.”
Jetstar
“Jetstar is the only value-based model established by a full service
airline to have reported profits for two straight years since start-up.
Last month, it became the first long haul international value-based
airline,” Mr Dixon said.
“We are aggressively expanding Jetstar to provide profitable growth in
markets that are not economic with the Qantas product and cost
structure.”
Engineering
“We have undertaken an extensive review of our engineering operations
over the past year, with the aim of achieving globally competitive costs
and efficiency,” Mr Dixon said.
“Rather than take the easy option of moving large parts of our
maintenance activities offshore, we are well advanced on strategies to
restructure our wide-body and narrow-body heavy maintenance operations
within Australia and have already moved closer to world best practice
efficiency.
“This maintains a skilled jobs in Australia.
“If we get this right, we will have the opportunity to bring
maintenance of aircraft that are now offshore back onshore.”
Defence
Qantas’ commitment to ongoing cooperation and support (when requested)
to the Australian Defence Forces is total, ongoing, and always will be.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You were either instructed to modify it or you realised how bad you would look if any more people read it and did it off your own bat.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love it
GD comes out swinging and takes on the aviation industry.there is no doubt he is right in ALL those issues he mentioned, but he does not answer question related to pilots/cabin crew's conditions &more jobs going offshore and more importantly how are they going to pay for all that extra debt and they expected 25% compound return anually. natuarally the government cant be too happy as they will loose about 500 million a year in corporate tax. i think it is slowly sinking in with the libs pollies that they created a market where now foreign companies can the buy anything in OZ and the government helps negatively gear it to foreign interests. and to help avoid any industrial issues we changed the IR laws so you can change conditons of employment. bloody good job 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The QF LH cabin crew in here are a funny lot. I thought you guys used to just attack shorthaulers, Qantas management, the FAAA etc...
But nope - you all turn on each other all the time as well. Its quite amusing (yet pathetic at the same time) to sit back and watch you rip the **** out of each other. If this forum is representative of what goes on at your workplace it must be hell.
Good luck when it comes to any negotiating with respect to your EBA.
But nope - you all turn on each other all the time as well. Its quite amusing (yet pathetic at the same time) to sit back and watch you rip the **** out of each other. If this forum is representative of what goes on at your workplace it must be hell.
Good luck when it comes to any negotiating with respect to your EBA.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah, Speedbirdhouse I second that.
Merry Christmas Sydney s/h.
And while we are on it,the same to Geoff Dixon and all the board.
ps sydney s/h Whats it like to work with all those who think dobbing in your workmates is allright.
qcc2,
I think your right about the resentment building up about the takeover because if it wasn't GD would not have come out with his blurb.He might be worried it's not going down the way he wants.Guys I reckon it's time to keep ringing our polies and the local rags as well
Merry Christmas Sydney s/h.
And while we are on it,the same to Geoff Dixon and all the board.
ps sydney s/h Whats it like to work with all those who think dobbing in your workmates is allright.
qcc2,
I think your right about the resentment building up about the takeover because if it wasn't GD would not have come out with his blurb.He might be worried it's not going down the way he wants.Guys I reckon it's time to keep ringing our polies and the local rags as well
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jetscar's pay for everything business model proving that it's all about "choice".
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roaming wolf - you seem alittle psycotic.
One minute you are trying to become buddies with other LH'ers on here and then you attack them. Strange character.
As for working with people who dob on each other - i am not aware of any crew who have dobbed on each other. Because someone made a post awhile ago about some paxing SH CSM dobbing on a LH crew doesnt mean it actually happened. Hate to break it to you Mr Wolf, but not everything said on these forums are actually the truth. Shocking - i know.
Anyway, dont waste your time or effort ****-slinging a "domestic" crewmember like me - there are plenty of Qantas LH'er you have to get back to attacking.
One minute you are trying to become buddies with other LH'ers on here and then you attack them. Strange character.
As for working with people who dob on each other - i am not aware of any crew who have dobbed on each other. Because someone made a post awhile ago about some paxing SH CSM dobbing on a LH crew doesnt mean it actually happened. Hate to break it to you Mr Wolf, but not everything said on these forums are actually the truth. Shocking - i know.
Anyway, dont waste your time or effort ****-slinging a "domestic" crewmember like me - there are plenty of Qantas LH'er you have to get back to attacking.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Merry Xmas.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let’s knock off all this bickering as it is getting us nowhere.it’s getting like a kindergarten in here.
Let’s see if we can get a dozen or so posts here without a shot being fired.
Now on to more important matters .I think qcc2 and roamingwolf are right and Darth is worried he might not pick up his Christmas bonus.His media release shows he is concerned the takeover might not be approved by the Government and Mr Costello in particular.
Notice how all of this just happens to be taking place over the holiday season.Methinks that this was not a coincidence and has been in the planning for some time.This way virttually everyone has other things on their mind and are being distracted.Perfect timing for an operation of this size.
I like the paragraph from the article raised by Speedbirdhouse…
”Passengers found such an offer hard to resist, especially since it was a full-service carrier, with meals included in the ticket. Passengers had to buy meals on board Jetstar. Sources also said the average load factor on the 180-seater aircraft was about 35%, which can make operations unviable to sustain.”
Let’s keep up the pressure on them and everyone have a safe and happy christmas
Let’s see if we can get a dozen or so posts here without a shot being fired.
Now on to more important matters .I think qcc2 and roamingwolf are right and Darth is worried he might not pick up his Christmas bonus.His media release shows he is concerned the takeover might not be approved by the Government and Mr Costello in particular.
Notice how all of this just happens to be taking place over the holiday season.Methinks that this was not a coincidence and has been in the planning for some time.This way virttually everyone has other things on their mind and are being distracted.Perfect timing for an operation of this size.
I like the paragraph from the article raised by Speedbirdhouse…
”Passengers found such an offer hard to resist, especially since it was a full-service carrier, with meals included in the ticket. Passengers had to buy meals on board Jetstar. Sources also said the average load factor on the 180-seater aircraft was about 35%, which can make operations unviable to sustain.”
Let’s keep up the pressure on them and everyone have a safe and happy christmas
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
given the latest
comments by peter costello today it seems he is given the strongest indication yet if he approves the sale ,all bets are off with SQ/EK and others.
having spoken to a state libs (yeah, the enemy) backbencher many of them dont like the idea at all.as i mentioned before the new tax rules allow foreign companies to pick up any local icon on some magic financial engineered package and use the australian taxpayer/ office to pay for it. negative gearing is beiing brought to new heights.
this is only the beginning of a lot more deals like that under johnny howards new australia. 
having spoken to a state libs (yeah, the enemy) backbencher many of them dont like the idea at all.as i mentioned before the new tax rules allow foreign companies to pick up any local icon on some magic financial engineered package and use the australian taxpayer/ office to pay for it. negative gearing is beiing brought to new heights.
this is only the beginning of a lot more deals like that under johnny howards new australia.