Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Other Aircrew Forums > Cabin Crew
Reload this Page >

QANTAS - Australia II

Cabin Crew Where professional flight attendants discuss matters that affect our jobs & lives.

QANTAS - Australia II

Old 18th Dec 2006, 04:44
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hawkeye,

My post was I guess another idea but it was made after seeing that the pilots were thinking of it.I reckon it does not take a brain surgeon to see that if another group in your company is trying something then we should at least look at it.

If we don't do that then we are not looking at everything we can do and by the way has anyone rung their local politician?
roamingwolf is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2006, 10:16
  #222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: queensland
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Roaming,
fair point. And yes at least one person has, Me.
I told his assistant it was reminiscent of the Snowy River Scheme and I and thousands of other aussies wanted some of our iconic institutions to remain a supported and iconic legacy for future aussie (not texan ) generations to enjoy and be proud of, not divided up and ruined.I told him we would not vote for a Government come election time if they did not hold such values as an important part of our way of life.
He believed me. I was very sincere in offering my concerns and my voting intentions.
hawke eye is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2006, 20:30
  #223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somewhere about 12k's
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Superannuation

You are free to move your superannuation to another fund. The Colonial 1st state super fund has been very good for me
r3please is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2006, 21:03
  #224 (permalink)  
Registered User **
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lurker ,
I have asked QF super and they categorically deny the new owners or any owners for that matter can touch our money. Having said that, stranger things have happened. However if it did Darth would have to move overseas as well as most of the board of Mac Bank.

R3please,
The point is that our money is in a super fund and it is supposed to be safe. If we move it to another fund, is it any safer from the dangerously ever-present corporate thieves who pervade every part of our life.

I find it funny though that a certain ex NSW labour Premier who nearly wrecked the NSW economy is now a consultant to guess which bank?

I remember when I joined QF and it was something to be very proud of. The company advertised how good the conditions were and to be honest they were. It was money in the bank however now, all of the things that were promised to us as part of our remuneration package are now supposed to be a privilege not a right.I imagine that a lot of things such as staff travel that we take for granted although greatly reduced are at risk from the new owners.

On another note I guess that Pegasus’ letter was as close as he will ever get to admitting that he and Guardian are the elected officials of the FAAA but I did get a laugh out of my supposed identity.Well,whether Guardian is the albino is as irrelevant as is my identity.However if the FAAA holds back with their usual rhetoric and ridicule then I will as well. Can someone pass the schnapps?

I still believe though that we have to fight fire with fire rather than sitting on our hands and if Darth tells the press that we are paid more than other crew then we should point out to the media that our board is paid far more on a percentage basis than other airlines corporate managers.
lowerlobe is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2006, 21:19
  #225 (permalink)  
Registered User **
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lurker,
Yes I know what you mean and although I am very sceptical about anything published by the media ..stranger things have happened before as I said.
lowerlobe is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2006, 21:22
  #226 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somewhere about 12k's
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Superannuation

Ask ex ANSETT employee's how safe their super was. Did they ever see any of it?
r3please is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2006, 23:05
  #227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lurker@L5
I've just been informed by senior Qantas Management that Geoff is going to use his $60 million charity proceeds to set up an orphanage for the bastard children of Australian corporate executives
Ooohhhh.............that's gotta hurt.

Get that man a saucer of milk.
speedbirdhouse is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2006, 23:05
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
r3please,

yeah they did.
sydney s/h is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2006, 23:11
  #229 (permalink)  
Registered User **
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
r3 please,

An employees did get SOME money but not all of it and that is a travesty.

The Ansett super was set up totally differently to that of QF.Apparently ours is set up in a different company it perhaps it would be better if the FAAA super rep would explain here how this is so.

Now is that Pegasus or Guardian ?
lowerlobe is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2006, 23:46
  #230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: springfield retirement castle
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well it seems QF shorthaul pilots have decided to remain on their expired pre reform EBA for the time being, in order to maintain their existing terms and conditions, and avoid exposing themselves to potentially having a post reform EBA cancelled with 90 days notice. Interesting....

Last edited by jaded boiler; 19th Dec 2006 at 01:50.
jaded boiler is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2006, 00:18
  #231 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Excuse a pilot for butting in here but JB has raised the point and I think it germane to point out a glaring difference in opinion about the value of remaining on a pre-reform EBA between the pilots union and the FAAA.

The difference as I understand it is that the only way to cancel a pre-reform EBA is when it is in the "public-interest". So to cancel the current F/A awards would have to be done in some way with demonstrated that. How Geoff Dixon could show that, provided the FAAA acts in a responsible manner and bargains in good faith, is difficult to surmise. I suggest it would be almost impossible.

If the company becomes privately owned, I would suggest that there would be zero chance of Dixon convincing a judge that cancelling long held and properly negotiated awards could be construed as being in the public interest.

In which case being on the current EBA, with an election looming, may be the safest course.
The_Cutest_of_Borg is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2006, 00:31
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
well said COB

and i think the faaa has been paying attention to the shorthaul pilots eba.
the papers report some of the actu head honchos are in a bit of a dilemma. they dont want the sale of qf but they also sit on the boards of industry superfunds which have exposure to qf. i hope they will take the long term view
as for geoff's continious assurance it is "business as usual". yeah right
show us the details of the finacial plan then we can assess what is going down in the future
qcc2 is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2006, 00:36
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: springfield retirement castle
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thankyou for your input Borg. This has been my interpretation also.

As I'm inevitably about to be labelled an "armchair" IR expert, I'd just like to state that I'm also something of an "armchair" philosopher, so I might share some bon mots that seem rather prescient.

It appears that there is tendency amongst humans, particularly when in small groups, to consciously see that which they desire to see. We seem to have difficulty perceiving concepts and ideas which may evoke personally negative connotations, whilst seeing with increasing mollification things that are felt to be positive, and ostensibly comply with the group goal. Ideas that initially provoke anxiety and defensiveness, for instance, either because of an individual or group's personal histories, biases or perceptions, require much greater elucidation before being properly understood.

In the current perilous IR environment, the widest-ranging legal opinions need to be sought, and considered with an open mind, before reaching a consensus on the best way forward. Employee representatives need to avoid being dogmatic, and be flexible enough to unashamedly alter tactics, should more effective options present themselves.

Finally, remember at the next election, the present federal government is no friend of employees. End of rant, time for a bex and a cup of tea.

Last edited by jaded boiler; 19th Dec 2006 at 04:46.
jaded boiler is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2006, 00:45
  #234 (permalink)  
Registered User **
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's obvious that the FAAA are easily offended and are quick to respond to any criticism whether real or inferred.

However,It's time that the FAAA stated the position of our superannuation and if they still believe that a pre reform EBA is not advantageous compared to negotiating a post reform EBA.

Can the FAAA explain why the s/h tech crew made their decision ?

You can do that here or in a newsletter "Imprimatur"
lowerlobe is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2006, 01:18
  #235 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I can tell you why the S/H tech crew made their decision. The deal on offer did not include any CPI rises to the hourly rate which, long term, grossly affects remuneration and super. It was in effect a four year pay freeze

Also a key plank of AIPA stance is that the company gives undertakings that on expiry of the EBA, that current conditions will remain intact. The company refuses to do this, quoting the line, "We do not intend to cancel the award so there is no need to put that in writing." Akin to North Korea saying, "We don't intend to ever use nuclear weapons so there is no need for us to agree not to build them."

It should be noted that this was not the actual EBA vote, but an internal AIPA poll, laying out the facts as the negotiating team sees them and asking for the opinion of the members whether further negotiation is required.

75% of respondents did not see the deal as being acceptable.
The_Cutest_of_Borg is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2006, 03:08
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just when I thought it was a done deal another bit of info comes our way which I reckon is at odds with what the faaa tell us.

Boys ,if the techies reckon the way to go is to stay on their eba then maybe we should think twice about trying to get a new one for us.

This kind of makes sense if a new eba with the new IR laws is a bit iffy then I reckon we should stay with what we know.

This going to get some of you guys in the office upset but I'm sure you can see the point and if the pilots union has got legal advice to do it then we should look at it real close


Twiggs,

I told you ,no more pm's. I'm not interested, NO means NO
roamingwolf is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2006, 05:44
  #237 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My understanding is that the FAAA leadership is not in any hurry to see the end of our current EBA.

What has been mooted is that if a new EBA were possible and maintained enoigh of what is important then it might be worth taking a new agreement to flight attendants for a vote.

If what is on offer does not give the necessary guarantees and benefits then we would stay on our current EBA and would be no worse off.

To commence any discussions with Qantas is not dangerous. But as i have previously said on here, i dont believe that a new and early EBA is of interest to Qantas.

I think that they would rather wait and see if Howard gets reelected and take everything rather than settle for potentially less than that.

The next 12 months will be very interesting and the private ownership has thrown additional complexity to an already precarious position.

As a very senior manager said recently if you think that i cant replace all sh/lh crew at half the current price you are kidding yourselves. they may lack experience but they will make up for that in enthusiasm and be acrosss the job in less than six months.

Goodwill, experience and loyalty/dedication dont seem to be able to compete with that. Workchoices/Howard and the new right mantra are the compelling choice available to both Dixon now and potential new owners
Pegasus747 is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2006, 05:49
  #238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne, oz
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
R3Please,

Ansett crew got all their super and quickly. ( wrong again lowerlobe but don't let the facts get in the way of a good bit of scaremongering )The fund was fully funded at the time of the collapse and always had been thanks to the good work of the trustees, 3 of which were flight attendants and union reps.

My understanding is that if there is a surplus in company superannuation funds ( i.e there is more in there than required to pay everyone out ) then the company can use the surplus.

I am assuming that the 231 mill. is surplus at present . This can occur with benefit promise type funds when investment performance exceeds the amount promised.

I would imagine the super you are entitled to is safe and sound .

Are many flight attendants/union reps trustees of your super fund??
priapism is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2006, 05:56
  #239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: springfield retirement castle
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good post Pegasus. All too often unions, organised labour and indeed the Labor Party itself seem more interested in internicine bickering than forming a united front to take on the true enemy.

People need to put personality issues aside and focus on the real challenges.
jaded boiler is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2006, 07:57
  #240 (permalink)  
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,

Hate to rain on your parade but things with Ansett were not as cosy and cut and dried as you have made out.You statement that all employees got their super and quickly seems at odds with this report.

“As you can see this was an extremely difficult and complex situation. As there were five Ansett Superannuation Plans (some with the same directors) there were a multitude of problems to deal with. Whilst the commercial settlement effectively means no more money will be paid into the superannuation funds, had the Trustee not commenced proceedings in 2001, then they would not have achieved a further $39m going directly to their members as cash payments. Other Ansett Superannuation Plan members will share in the balance as well as other Ansett employees who were not members of the five plans”.

“The current insolvency provisions in the Act are inadequate to protect outstanding superannuation entitlements. It is obvious that trust deeds could be amended to make the employer directly liable to fully fund the trust, but if the Act is not amended to firstly recognise this priority and secondly to stop Administrators from varying this priority, then no outstanding superannuation entitlements will be fully protected.”
Apparently Ansett had not made any employer contributions for August and Sept ( obviously up to the time of the collapse) and action had to be taken to recoup those funds.

Priapism,I don’t know what else you think I have got wrong but it doesn’t seem to be the case here does it.
lowerlobe is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.