QANTAS - Australia II
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: over the rainbow
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: over the rainbow
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vince ,
What do you mean by no days off in out ports all days off in home port.
By the way ,how do you know what the T & C's for the Thai based J* in. crew are ?
The conditions for Thair based QF crew are very different to L/H Aus crew so the conditions for aus J* int crew maybe very different to their overseas bases
Twiggs ,what day of the week is this?
What do you mean by no days off in out ports all days off in home port.
By the way ,how do you know what the T & C's for the Thai based J* in. crew are ?
The conditions for Thair based QF crew are very different to L/H Aus crew so the conditions for aus J* int crew maybe very different to their overseas bases
Twiggs ,what day of the week is this?
Hello,
What I meant about no days off in out ports is that rumor has it that the company looked at using slip days as off days while on trips.
Don't know anything about o/seas conditions. Heard not that good though.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure but I heard a rumour that a middle eastern airline is trying that with the pilots.So if your trip has a day off in Singapore that counts towards your days off per roster.
That'd be beaut wouldn't it.
If Aus J* int crew hours are up to 152 per roster then maybe the thai crew for J* int may be more.
If we say they do 28 days take away 8 days min rest then make it 2 rosters to make it the same as us.that makes it 40 days flying per same roster as us. That makes it 10 hours a day if they are supposed to do 400 hours .
I admit this sounds high but if J* made the Thai crew count the slip ports as days off..nahh that is still too much.tYou'd have to have into account hols,etc and they would never stay at home. Even at 152 hours or 204 in a 56 day roster that still means 7.6 per day..Not happy Jan
That'd be beaut wouldn't it.
If Aus J* int crew hours are up to 152 per roster then maybe the thai crew for J* int may be more.
If we say they do 28 days take away 8 days min rest then make it 2 rosters to make it the same as us.that makes it 40 days flying per same roster as us. That makes it 10 hours a day if they are supposed to do 400 hours .
I admit this sounds high but if J* made the Thai crew count the slip ports as days off..nahh that is still too much.tYou'd have to have into account hols,etc and they would never stay at home. Even at 152 hours or 204 in a 56 day roster that still means 7.6 per day..Not happy Jan
Last edited by roamingwolf; 6th Dec 2006 at 04:43.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mount Olympus
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hark..forsooth
Methinks I hear the patter of Tightslot`s delicate feet.
...and Twiggs deletes her paranoid post
...and Twiggs deletes her paranoid post
Last edited by prunezeuss; 6th Dec 2006 at 09:03. Reason: Twiggs Deletes her post
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: springfield retirement castle
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anybody like to make a prediction as to what the wage and employment package will be for QF long haul cabin crew, subsequent to the expiration of any new EBA agreed to under the present government's industrial relations regime?
Bear in mind that any new EBA agreed to now, can be unilaterally terminated by an employer with 90 days notice after its date of expiry, and also remember, that when this happens, the employer is then only legally obliged to provide the following: 10 days per annum sick leave, 12 months unpaid maternity leave, 4 weeks per annum annual leave, 38 hours per week work averaged out over 12 months, and a minimum wage of $13.47 per hour. Nothing more than this, nothing.
So what do reckon QF would do??
Bear in mind that any new EBA agreed to now, can be unilaterally terminated by an employer with 90 days notice after its date of expiry, and also remember, that when this happens, the employer is then only legally obliged to provide the following: 10 days per annum sick leave, 12 months unpaid maternity leave, 4 weeks per annum annual leave, 38 hours per week work averaged out over 12 months, and a minimum wage of $13.47 per hour. Nothing more than this, nothing.
So what do reckon QF would do??
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I reckon with the industrial negotiation tactic of waving a white flag the result will not be pretty.If the takeout ,I mean takeover happens then the same tactic will mean most of us will be applying for either a major supermarket chain or an overseas airline.
The rumor is that MM is offering 20 hours extra a roster with no tradeoffs as long as they sign an 3 year eba now instead of next year.Will it work who knows
The rumor is that MM is offering 20 hours extra a roster with no tradeoffs as long as they sign an 3 year eba now instead of next year.Will it work who knows
Last edited by roamingwolf; 6th Dec 2006 at 20:21.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
should know
within the next two weeks if the buyout is on. at this stage it looks like its going ahead however heavy negotiations on the politicial fimpact are still ongoing. as you can imagine little jonny couldn't care less, however in an election year he is going to be very careful.
jaded boiler, as far as i understand it the company CANNOT unilaterally terminate an expired eba after 90 days. also your doom scenario of minimum conditions aren't quite right. let the faa guys here comment on it.
jaded boiler, as far as i understand it the company CANNOT unilaterally terminate an expired eba after 90 days. also your doom scenario of minimum conditions aren't quite right. let the faa guys here comment on it.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: springfield retirement castle
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qcc2, I can assure you, that 90 days after the expiration of any EBA that has been agreed to AFTER the new IR laws took effect last March, it can be unilaterally terminated, with your employer then only legally having to comply with the five minimum conditions stated above.
Be very wary of signing up to anything, pay rise or not. Be aware of what you are exposing yourself to.
The rates of pay and conditions of any EBA that was signed up to PRIOR to the laws changing last March remain perpetually effective after its expiry, provided no new EBA is agreed to.
Consider this scenario: sign up for new EBA for 3 years, company includes possible sweetener of, say, 1% pay rise annually. 3 years hence, EBA expires, 90 days notice is given that it is being terminated. QF then give 90 days to sign up to an AWA with a total salary package of, say, $35 000 per annum, with a caveat that if this is not agreed to in the 90 day time frame, the salary on offer will then be $26 700 (federally mandated minimum wage). Instant saving for the company of roughly $14 million per annum in wage bills for long haul cabin crew alone.
Think they haven't thought about this? Why so keen to discuss EBAs all of a sudden? Anything to do with interest by private equity, who ruthlessly use every legal means available to them to slash costs, then sell the husk of the company that remains for a profit typically in a 5 to 6 year time frame.
Be very wary of signing up to anything, pay rise or not. Be aware of what you are exposing yourself to.
The rates of pay and conditions of any EBA that was signed up to PRIOR to the laws changing last March remain perpetually effective after its expiry, provided no new EBA is agreed to.
Consider this scenario: sign up for new EBA for 3 years, company includes possible sweetener of, say, 1% pay rise annually. 3 years hence, EBA expires, 90 days notice is given that it is being terminated. QF then give 90 days to sign up to an AWA with a total salary package of, say, $35 000 per annum, with a caveat that if this is not agreed to in the 90 day time frame, the salary on offer will then be $26 700 (federally mandated minimum wage). Instant saving for the company of roughly $14 million per annum in wage bills for long haul cabin crew alone.
Think they haven't thought about this? Why so keen to discuss EBAs all of a sudden? Anything to do with interest by private equity, who ruthlessly use every legal means available to them to slash costs, then sell the husk of the company that remains for a profit typically in a 5 to 6 year time frame.
Last edited by jaded boiler; 7th Dec 2006 at 11:28.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a little knowledge is a dangerous thing
"The rates of pay and conditions of any EBA that was signed up to PRIOR to the laws changing last March remain perpetually effective after its expiry, provided no new EBA is agreed to." ...Jaded boiler
Essentially this is correct..except that when a Pre reform EBA expires the Company can apply to terminate an EBA and the commission after applying a public interest test must terminate it.
The current LH EBA is a pre reform EBA and there fore subject to that.
New EBA's signed post the march 06 changes reequire 90 days notice for termination and the commission must also terminate the agreement.
If the Company decides to utilise workchoices and not have another EBA with LH crew, then after 15dec 2007 they can apply to the AIRC for termination. We as long Haul crew would then fall to the "award" that sits there still but is vastly reduced in salary and reduced to a few allowable matters.
Almost every application by employers to terminate EBA's in 2006 were succesful in their entirity.
These are very dangerous times. Those that are repeating what they are being told be the uninformed have potential to do serious damage if misnomers are accepted as fact.
For those 800 flight attendants that attended the FAAA briefing should understand these issues. I think that the LH flight attendants should be seriously worried about not getting another EBA.
I certainly hope that a new EBA can be negotiated that provides , on going job security, promotion, growth for the LH division, the current redundancy conditions and protection of core conditions.
Unless that is achieved then i believe that Individual contracts in the form of AWA's will be what is headed our way.
The next election will be about the sort of AUstralia we want to live in and hand to the next generation. I say..."DONT LET JOHN HOWARD AND WORKCHOICES THROW YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN OVERBOARD"
Essentially this is correct..except that when a Pre reform EBA expires the Company can apply to terminate an EBA and the commission after applying a public interest test must terminate it.
The current LH EBA is a pre reform EBA and there fore subject to that.
New EBA's signed post the march 06 changes reequire 90 days notice for termination and the commission must also terminate the agreement.
If the Company decides to utilise workchoices and not have another EBA with LH crew, then after 15dec 2007 they can apply to the AIRC for termination. We as long Haul crew would then fall to the "award" that sits there still but is vastly reduced in salary and reduced to a few allowable matters.
Almost every application by employers to terminate EBA's in 2006 were succesful in their entirity.
These are very dangerous times. Those that are repeating what they are being told be the uninformed have potential to do serious damage if misnomers are accepted as fact.
For those 800 flight attendants that attended the FAAA briefing should understand these issues. I think that the LH flight attendants should be seriously worried about not getting another EBA.
I certainly hope that a new EBA can be negotiated that provides , on going job security, promotion, growth for the LH division, the current redundancy conditions and protection of core conditions.
Unless that is achieved then i believe that Individual contracts in the form of AWA's will be what is headed our way.
The next election will be about the sort of AUstralia we want to live in and hand to the next generation. I say..."DONT LET JOHN HOWARD AND WORKCHOICES THROW YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN OVERBOARD"
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The interesting part of the last post is that there is a chance that if a new eba is signed then because that was drafted after the new industrial laws it is vulnerable to being squashed.
So if we do nothing and wait until our current eba finishes we then have to do something anyway.So at best we wait 12 months but then we are back to square one.It seems that we should get some heavy weight legal advice here.
I reckon it is time to pay a few dollars each and get the big guns in the form of a qc to understand where we stand and what our best move is.
If there is any legal possibility of the new owners doing this they will because money is the bottom line to them as that is why they are buying us not because they like qf.
As there is an election next year the company will probably not want to do anything that would jeopardize the Libs so we should use that to our advantage as well.
What Pegasus is saying is essentially true but as he just repeated what jaded boiler said and that is if we sign a new eba which is post march last year then the company or whoever owns it can ask the commission to squash it.
It is not any good just to go on and on and on about throwing out Howard we must accept the possibility of him winning and act accordingly
Pegasus if we fall back to our award and how can we have a vastly reduced pay.If we are based on our award then we are on our award
So signing a new eba is no guarantee of safety either because as you said it can be removed so how is that going to give us security or promotion or anything.What is the advantage of a new eba when it can bve removed when our current eba is pre- new ir laws
We must get decent legal advice and not just from our usual source
So if we do nothing and wait until our current eba finishes we then have to do something anyway.So at best we wait 12 months but then we are back to square one.It seems that we should get some heavy weight legal advice here.
I reckon it is time to pay a few dollars each and get the big guns in the form of a qc to understand where we stand and what our best move is.
If there is any legal possibility of the new owners doing this they will because money is the bottom line to them as that is why they are buying us not because they like qf.
As there is an election next year the company will probably not want to do anything that would jeopardize the Libs so we should use that to our advantage as well.
What Pegasus is saying is essentially true but as he just repeated what jaded boiler said and that is if we sign a new eba which is post march last year then the company or whoever owns it can ask the commission to squash it.
It is not any good just to go on and on and on about throwing out Howard we must accept the possibility of him winning and act accordingly
Pegasus if we fall back to our award and how can we have a vastly reduced pay.If we are based on our award then we are on our award
So signing a new eba is no guarantee of safety either because as you said it can be removed so how is that going to give us security or promotion or anything.What is the advantage of a new eba when it can bve removed when our current eba is pre- new ir laws
We must get decent legal advice and not just from our usual source
Last edited by roamingwolf; 6th Dec 2006 at 22:31.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
airport security
on something else just to lighten it up a bit.Here is a post from another thread on airport screening.
A while ago on this forum, someone suggested that the baddies could hold the pilots family hostage and force him/her to take something onto the aircraft. Thats why pilots have to be screened.
That is the sort of moronic, illogical suff we are up against here. And the trouble is, it seems the gov has basically given security carte-blanch to do what ever they want. Say the wrong thing, like " I allready HAVE control of the aircraft buddy" to a security guy, and you could find yourself in serious hot water.
I wonder who could have said the bit about pilots families being taken hostage.
A while ago on this forum, someone suggested that the baddies could hold the pilots family hostage and force him/her to take something onto the aircraft. Thats why pilots have to be screened.
That is the sort of moronic, illogical suff we are up against here. And the trouble is, it seems the gov has basically given security carte-blanch to do what ever they want. Say the wrong thing, like " I allready HAVE control of the aircraft buddy" to a security guy, and you could find yourself in serious hot water.
I wonder who could have said the bit about pilots families being taken hostage.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to Roaming Wolf and anyone else interested.
Can i suggest that these issues are very complex and took the FAAA at least 3 hours to cover at their recent meetings.
The FAAA took legal advice from to industrial lawyers and then had that advice checked by Jim Nolan an industrial barrister from the denman chambers in sydney. For those that do not know,Jim Nolan is used by the pilots as well as most major unions for expert industrial legal advice.
The FAAA strategy has largely been adopted following extensive consultation and legal advice. I suggest that anyone that wants a detailed explanation call Michael Mijatov personally in the FAAA office. He will be happy to take any call at any time from members to ensure they are appropriately educated and provided with correct information. He said this publicly at the recent faaa meetings
The FAAA number is 8337 1111
Call the office and ask for MM. If you dont understand the complexity of the legal arguments he will explain it to you in simple terms as he has done at all the meetings.
Much of what is said in here is totally incorrect. The FAAA has taken expert legal advice and employs two lawyers as Industrial Officers. The FAAA will not leave any stone unturned in order to make sure it is acting in accordance with the LAW and advice from experts.
Can i suggest that these issues are very complex and took the FAAA at least 3 hours to cover at their recent meetings.
The FAAA took legal advice from to industrial lawyers and then had that advice checked by Jim Nolan an industrial barrister from the denman chambers in sydney. For those that do not know,Jim Nolan is used by the pilots as well as most major unions for expert industrial legal advice.
The FAAA strategy has largely been adopted following extensive consultation and legal advice. I suggest that anyone that wants a detailed explanation call Michael Mijatov personally in the FAAA office. He will be happy to take any call at any time from members to ensure they are appropriately educated and provided with correct information. He said this publicly at the recent faaa meetings
The FAAA number is 8337 1111
Call the office and ask for MM. If you dont understand the complexity of the legal arguments he will explain it to you in simple terms as he has done at all the meetings.
Much of what is said in here is totally incorrect. The FAAA has taken expert legal advice and employs two lawyers as Industrial Officers. The FAAA will not leave any stone unturned in order to make sure it is acting in accordance with the LAW and advice from experts.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
new eba ,trouble or benefit
I have to agree with Schlonghaul,
I reckon we have 2 options.
1: we keep our current eba and if the company wants to dismantle it the commissioner has to make a test case and it has to be successful and more than likely we stay on our award..
2: We go along the faaa preferred option which is to negotiate a new eba which Pegasus747 has admitted can be dismantled with only 90 days notice and no test case involved.
So can someone tell me the advantage of going for a new eba which is not worth the paper it is written on.
What is the rush especially when whoever owns or runs the company can apply to the commission to have the new eba null and void with only 90 days notice and not one thing we can do about it
I reckon we have 2 options.
1: we keep our current eba and if the company wants to dismantle it the commissioner has to make a test case and it has to be successful and more than likely we stay on our award..
2: We go along the faaa preferred option which is to negotiate a new eba which Pegasus747 has admitted can be dismantled with only 90 days notice and no test case involved.
So can someone tell me the advantage of going for a new eba which is not worth the paper it is written on.
What is the rush especially when whoever owns or runs the company can apply to the commission to have the new eba null and void with only 90 days notice and not one thing we can do about it
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Faaa Newsletter
8 December 2006 ID72-06
Attention all Qantas Long Haul and Australian Airlines Flight Attendants
FAAA INTERNATIONAL DIVISION PUTS FORWARD PLAN FOR FAAA INTEGRATION
I wish to advise members that the International Division yesterday formally responded to the Domestic/Regional Division with a plan to form the basis for integration of the current two Divisions of the FAAA.
I take this opportunity to publicly inform our membership that in late 2003, I (Michael Mijatov) initiated confidential discussions between senior officials of the International Division and our senior counterparts in the Domestic/Regional Division of the FAAA.
Once I became the Secretary of the International Division in March 2004, the discussions had the formal imprimatur of this Division and it has been the policy of this Division to attempt to reverse the Divisionalisation of the FAAA that occurred in 2000.
It is self evident that an integrated FAAA structure would have benefits for all FAAA members both in industrial terms and in terms of a more effective, efficient and more financially secure FAAA.
However, I above all current elected officials in both Divisions of the FAAA witnessed the debilitating instability, arguments and resentment that ultimately caused the de-facto split of the FAAA in 2000.
Therefore, we in this Division of the FAAA, believe that it is both prudent and essential that certain matters have to be agreed to, before there can be a full “union” between the two FAAA Divisions. The most important of these are as follows:-
1) The FAAA must be structured in a way that the legitimate interests of members in each airline grouping are acknowledged in the Rules of the FAAA.
2) Industrial decisions made by each airline grouping must not be able to be thwarted, blocked or overridden by a coalition of officials from other airline groupings.
3) Election to and voting on, elective bodies in the FAAA must be on the basis of proportional representation (for example it would be unacceptable that almost 3000 Qantas Long Haul members have the same representation on a newly constituted FAAA as would another group of flight attendants with say 600 members).
Many of these issues are complex, but must be properly addressed, to ensure that if we do restructure the FAAA, we do it on a proper basis, to prevent the chaos of pre- 2000 recurring.
We have also indicated to the Domestic/Regional Division that if full re-integration is not possible we are keen to adopt a whole raft of other practical measures which would have the effect of closer industrial co-ordination. We also indicated that sharing of premises would also be possible as far as our Division is concerned, even if full integration is not practical or possible.
We will advise you of developments in due course.
Written and authorised by Michael Mijatov – Secretary International Division.
20 Ewan Street Mascot NSW 2020 Tel 61 2 8337 1111 Fax 61 2 8337 1122 Emergency Contact 0414 894 192
Attention all Qantas Long Haul and Australian Airlines Flight Attendants
FAAA INTERNATIONAL DIVISION PUTS FORWARD PLAN FOR FAAA INTEGRATION
I wish to advise members that the International Division yesterday formally responded to the Domestic/Regional Division with a plan to form the basis for integration of the current two Divisions of the FAAA.
I take this opportunity to publicly inform our membership that in late 2003, I (Michael Mijatov) initiated confidential discussions between senior officials of the International Division and our senior counterparts in the Domestic/Regional Division of the FAAA.
Once I became the Secretary of the International Division in March 2004, the discussions had the formal imprimatur of this Division and it has been the policy of this Division to attempt to reverse the Divisionalisation of the FAAA that occurred in 2000.
It is self evident that an integrated FAAA structure would have benefits for all FAAA members both in industrial terms and in terms of a more effective, efficient and more financially secure FAAA.
However, I above all current elected officials in both Divisions of the FAAA witnessed the debilitating instability, arguments and resentment that ultimately caused the de-facto split of the FAAA in 2000.
Therefore, we in this Division of the FAAA, believe that it is both prudent and essential that certain matters have to be agreed to, before there can be a full “union” between the two FAAA Divisions. The most important of these are as follows:-
1) The FAAA must be structured in a way that the legitimate interests of members in each airline grouping are acknowledged in the Rules of the FAAA.
2) Industrial decisions made by each airline grouping must not be able to be thwarted, blocked or overridden by a coalition of officials from other airline groupings.
3) Election to and voting on, elective bodies in the FAAA must be on the basis of proportional representation (for example it would be unacceptable that almost 3000 Qantas Long Haul members have the same representation on a newly constituted FAAA as would another group of flight attendants with say 600 members).
Many of these issues are complex, but must be properly addressed, to ensure that if we do restructure the FAAA, we do it on a proper basis, to prevent the chaos of pre- 2000 recurring.
We have also indicated to the Domestic/Regional Division that if full re-integration is not possible we are keen to adopt a whole raft of other practical measures which would have the effect of closer industrial co-ordination. We also indicated that sharing of premises would also be possible as far as our Division is concerned, even if full integration is not practical or possible.
We will advise you of developments in due course.
Written and authorised by Michael Mijatov – Secretary International Division.
20 Ewan Street Mascot NSW 2020 Tel 61 2 8337 1111 Fax 61 2 8337 1122 Emergency Contact 0414 894 192
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: MELBOURNE
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
roamingwolf's comments
Pegasus747 is correct...... issues such as termination of EBA's are fairly complex.
Clearly, roamingwolf did not go the any of the 21 FAAA meetings that were recently held.
If he had, he would have understood the issues that he now raises.
A suggestion to roamingwolf and any others who didnt take the time to go to the FAAA meetings...... rather than making wrong and uninformed comment on here..... ring the FAAA and get the correct information.
It is amusing that we have these bush lawyers on here who understand very little of the complexities of the new IR laws, yet cannot help themselves in making incorrect comments.
All the matters that roamingwolf raises were comprehensively dealt with at the FAAA meetings...... next time roamingwolf go to a meeting and you will be informed.
In the interim, a suggestion,, don't comment on matters you obviously know nothing about. You will simply confuse and mislead others in the same manner that you are confused.
Clearly, roamingwolf did not go the any of the 21 FAAA meetings that were recently held.
If he had, he would have understood the issues that he now raises.
A suggestion to roamingwolf and any others who didnt take the time to go to the FAAA meetings...... rather than making wrong and uninformed comment on here..... ring the FAAA and get the correct information.
It is amusing that we have these bush lawyers on here who understand very little of the complexities of the new IR laws, yet cannot help themselves in making incorrect comments.
All the matters that roamingwolf raises were comprehensively dealt with at the FAAA meetings...... next time roamingwolf go to a meeting and you will be informed.
In the interim, a suggestion,, don't comment on matters you obviously know nothing about. You will simply confuse and mislead others in the same manner that you are confused.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HELP
Hi All
I am so sorry probably someone has already asked these questions before but i cannot find the answers.
I applied for Qantas Cabin Crew position about 15 days ago, someone called me and i had an interview on the phone lasting aprox 15 min, the guy left me his phone number and asked me to call him on Monday and he will let me know if i have passed. Could someone tell me is this common practice or do you think that this is good or bad news.
If i passed the phone interview, i was told that i would have to go to some hotel near LHR for an assement, does anyone know what questions they tent to ask at the test ect.
Many thanks!!!!!
I am so sorry probably someone has already asked these questions before but i cannot find the answers.
I applied for Qantas Cabin Crew position about 15 days ago, someone called me and i had an interview on the phone lasting aprox 15 min, the guy left me his phone number and asked me to call him on Monday and he will let me know if i have passed. Could someone tell me is this common practice or do you think that this is good or bad news.
If i passed the phone interview, i was told that i would have to go to some hotel near LHR for an assement, does anyone know what questions they tent to ask at the test ect.
Many thanks!!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HELP
Hi All
I am so sorry probably someone has already asked these questions before but i cannot find the answers.
I applied for Qantas Cabin Crew position about 15 days ago, someone called me and i had an interview on the phone lasting aprox 15 min, the guy left me his phone number and asked me to call him on Monday and he will let me know if i have passed. Could someone tell me is this common practice or do you think that this is good or bad news.
If i passed the phone interview, i was told that i would have to go to some hotel near LHR for an assement, does anyone know what questions they tent to ask at the test ect.
Many thanks!!!!!
I am so sorry probably someone has already asked these questions before but i cannot find the answers.
I applied for Qantas Cabin Crew position about 15 days ago, someone called me and i had an interview on the phone lasting aprox 15 min, the guy left me his phone number and asked me to call him on Monday and he will let me know if i have passed. Could someone tell me is this common practice or do you think that this is good or bad news.
If i passed the phone interview, i was told that i would have to go to some hotel near LHR for an assement, does anyone know what questions they tent to ask at the test ect.
Many thanks!!!!!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: At Home
Age: 46
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi All
I am so sorry probably someone has already asked these questions before but i cannot find the answers.
I applied for Qantas Cabin Crew position about 15 days ago, someone called me and i had an interview on the phone lasting aprox 15 min, the guy left me his phone number and asked me to call him on Monday and he will let me know if i have passed. Could someone tell me is this common practice or do you think that this is good or bad news.
If i passed the phone interview, i was told that i would have to go to some hotel near LHR for an assement, does anyone know what questions they tent to ask at the test ect.
Many thanks!!!!!
I am so sorry probably someone has already asked these questions before but i cannot find the answers.
I applied for Qantas Cabin Crew position about 15 days ago, someone called me and i had an interview on the phone lasting aprox 15 min, the guy left me his phone number and asked me to call him on Monday and he will let me know if i have passed. Could someone tell me is this common practice or do you think that this is good or bad news.
If i passed the phone interview, i was told that i would have to go to some hotel near LHR for an assement, does anyone know what questions they tent to ask at the test ect.
Many thanks!!!!!