QANTAS - Australia IV
I would like to point out that the greater majority of Short haul flight attendants are EX-LONG HAUL. Over the past few years Long haul FA's have been transferring from the dark side in droves. They also do a lot of the international flying.
I guess most of them are happy with the short haul conditions or they wouldn't be here!!!
I guess most of them are happy with the short haul conditions or they wouldn't be here!!!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: REAL WORLD
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the word from the bunker is
the bid gets through. most of the board goes ( replacement already in place), followed by a number of senior managers (restructure coming up again).
the bid fails- most of the board resigns for stupidity and looking rather silly ;followed by GD departure within 12 month.
keep the emails going to the pollies
the bid fails- most of the board resigns for stupidity and looking rather silly ;followed by GD departure within 12 month.
keep the emails going to the pollies
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A [better?] way to cope......
The weekend Financial Review had an excellent article by Robert Sutton that I’m sure will be of benefit for many of us at the rat. Especially those of us whose years of hard work and efforts are now measured by incompetent, sociopathic buffoons with no industry understanding together with a set of KPI’s being based upon our ability to generate reams of meaningless paperwork and our ability to fill in the dot.
Let’s face it ladies and gentleman. Those running this once proud company care NOTHING for it’s staff, or for that matter it’s continued LONG TERM success beyond it’s ability to provide them with MASSIVE personal wealth.
I know that I don’t need to remind current employees that we are treated like dirt but the following may help us cope.
------------------
“Stay detached. Passion is an overrated virtue in organizational life and indifference is underrated. This conclusion clashes with the message of most business books, which trumpet the power of exuding deep and authentic passion about your work, organization, colleagues and customers. All this talk is absolutely correct if you are in a good job and are treated with dignity and respect. But it is hypocritical nonsense to the millions of people who are trapped in jobs and companies where they feel oppressed and humiliated, where their goal is to survive with their health and self esteem intact and to provide for their families- not to do great things for a company that treats them like dirt.
Organizations that are filled with employees who don’t give a damn about their jobs will suffer poor performance, but in my book, if they routinely demean employees, they get what they deserve. When organizational life takes this ugly turn, linking your self-worth to how people treat you and putting all your effort and emotional energy into your workplace is a path to exploitation and self-destruction.
Self preservation sometimes requires the opposite response: learn to fell and practise indifference and emotional detachment. When your job feels like a prolonged personal insult, focus on just going through the motions, on caring as little as possible about the jerks around you, and think about something more pleasant as often as you can.
None of us has complete control over our surroundings, and we all get stuck with oppressive jerks whom we can’t change. There are times when the best thing for your mental health is not to give a damn about your job, company, and especially those nasty people. Some reseachers have suggested that “detached concern” can help employees avoid the burnout that results from constant exposure to other peoples problems. If you can’t bring yourself to care about good collegues, clients, and organizations, its a sign you need a break, to learn a new skill or move to a different job. But detached indifference- simply not giving a damn- might be the best that you can do to survive a workplace that subjects you to relentless humiliation.”
Let’s face it ladies and gentleman. Those running this once proud company care NOTHING for it’s staff, or for that matter it’s continued LONG TERM success beyond it’s ability to provide them with MASSIVE personal wealth.
I know that I don’t need to remind current employees that we are treated like dirt but the following may help us cope.
------------------
“Stay detached. Passion is an overrated virtue in organizational life and indifference is underrated. This conclusion clashes with the message of most business books, which trumpet the power of exuding deep and authentic passion about your work, organization, colleagues and customers. All this talk is absolutely correct if you are in a good job and are treated with dignity and respect. But it is hypocritical nonsense to the millions of people who are trapped in jobs and companies where they feel oppressed and humiliated, where their goal is to survive with their health and self esteem intact and to provide for their families- not to do great things for a company that treats them like dirt.
Organizations that are filled with employees who don’t give a damn about their jobs will suffer poor performance, but in my book, if they routinely demean employees, they get what they deserve. When organizational life takes this ugly turn, linking your self-worth to how people treat you and putting all your effort and emotional energy into your workplace is a path to exploitation and self-destruction.
Self preservation sometimes requires the opposite response: learn to fell and practise indifference and emotional detachment. When your job feels like a prolonged personal insult, focus on just going through the motions, on caring as little as possible about the jerks around you, and think about something more pleasant as often as you can.
None of us has complete control over our surroundings, and we all get stuck with oppressive jerks whom we can’t change. There are times when the best thing for your mental health is not to give a damn about your job, company, and especially those nasty people. Some reseachers have suggested that “detached concern” can help employees avoid the burnout that results from constant exposure to other peoples problems. If you can’t bring yourself to care about good collegues, clients, and organizations, its a sign you need a break, to learn a new skill or move to a different job. But detached indifference- simply not giving a damn- might be the best that you can do to survive a workplace that subjects you to relentless humiliation.”
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Detached Indifference
Thanks Speedbird:
i've been looking for a slogan to get thru 2007!
Bingo!
Detached Indifference ......it is.
Lets not have SAFETY WEEK this year.
My vote is DETACHED INDIFFERENCE week.
The coloured T- shirts will be -jaundiced
i've been looking for a slogan to get thru 2007!
Bingo!
Detached Indifference ......it is.
Lets not have SAFETY WEEK this year.
My vote is DETACHED INDIFFERENCE week.
The coloured T- shirts will be -jaundiced
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First Nomination
The inaugural nomination for the:
DETACHED INDIFFERENCE CONTRIBUTOR AWARD
goes to this gem in the latest Cabin Crew Newz:
Customer
Recovery
for Inflight
Entertainment
(IFE) Issues:
"We’ve experienced some ‘teething’ problems as
the new AVOD IFE system beds down. In light
of this and other IFE issues, some important
initiatives have been implemented.
eg:Before customers board the aircraft..........."
Can you believe that someone would actually write this horse excrement, in Feb2007 when this has been going on for over 18 months
Yep , I'm now more DETACHED and INDIFFERENT
DETACHED INDIFFERENCE CONTRIBUTOR AWARD
goes to this gem in the latest Cabin Crew Newz:
Customer
Recovery
for Inflight
Entertainment
(IFE) Issues:
"We’ve experienced some ‘teething’ problems as
the new AVOD IFE system beds down. In light
of this and other IFE issues, some important
initiatives have been implemented.
eg:Before customers board the aircraft..........."
Can you believe that someone would actually write this horse excrement, in Feb2007 when this has been going on for over 18 months
Yep , I'm now more DETACHED and INDIFFERENT
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting development regards the JFK slip (tech crew that is)
The tech crew union has argued that the 24 hour slip in JFK is insufficient to achieve suitable rest.
From BP 250 a second officer will be carried as well.....
I find it interesting that the tech crew have been able to argue that 24 hours is not enough and our union gave in and told us to vote YES to operating a shuttle.
If the tech crew think 24 hours is not enough they should try doing the shuttle........
As usual I'm waiting for the FAAA to tell us that the company has it tough and we have no right to ask for a slip in JFK.....
Thats MUFFIN MANAGEMENT idea of talking tough.....
The tech crew union has argued that the 24 hour slip in JFK is insufficient to achieve suitable rest.
From BP 250 a second officer will be carried as well.....
I find it interesting that the tech crew have been able to argue that 24 hours is not enough and our union gave in and told us to vote YES to operating a shuttle.
If the tech crew think 24 hours is not enough they should try doing the shuttle........
As usual I'm waiting for the FAAA to tell us that the company has it tough and we have no right to ask for a slip in JFK.....
Thats MUFFIN MANAGEMENT idea of talking tough.....
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest news from our esteemed Mr. Vaile
Vaile shrugs off Qantas debt fears
February 14, 2007
THE Federal Government is not worried about the massive amount of debt needed by private equity consortium Airline Partners Australia (APA) to successfully buy Qantas, Transport Minister Mark Vaile has said.
APA has offered $11 billion for the flying kangaroo with the bid now being examined by the Foreign Investment Review Board because some of the consortium's members are North American private equity groups.
Mr Vaile says the indebtedness of the consortium is not something for the Government to examine.
"It is (not), I don't believe, the Government's job to tell private sector organisations or the financial institutions what's an appropriate level of debt," Mr Vaile has said.
His comments contrast to those of his backbench colleague and former transport minister John Anderson who says the indebtedness of the consortium means the bid could fail to met the national interest.
Mr Vaile admitted it was possible the airline could go bust if the buyout was successful and the aviation industry was then hit with a crisis.
"That's not something we'd like to countenance," Mr Vaile has said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, well, I bet if Mr. Vaile's job was on the line, he would like to countenance THAT!!
Essentially he is saying that the possibility of the Company getting into financial difficulty is a real possibility, considering the amount of debt we will carry, and if that is the case, then...well...stiff bikkies. But hey, let's not mention the war, shall we?
How can we as taxpayers keep supporting these clowns
February 14, 2007
THE Federal Government is not worried about the massive amount of debt needed by private equity consortium Airline Partners Australia (APA) to successfully buy Qantas, Transport Minister Mark Vaile has said.
APA has offered $11 billion for the flying kangaroo with the bid now being examined by the Foreign Investment Review Board because some of the consortium's members are North American private equity groups.
Mr Vaile says the indebtedness of the consortium is not something for the Government to examine.
"It is (not), I don't believe, the Government's job to tell private sector organisations or the financial institutions what's an appropriate level of debt," Mr Vaile has said.
His comments contrast to those of his backbench colleague and former transport minister John Anderson who says the indebtedness of the consortium means the bid could fail to met the national interest.
Mr Vaile admitted it was possible the airline could go bust if the buyout was successful and the aviation industry was then hit with a crisis.
"That's not something we'd like to countenance," Mr Vaile has said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, well, I bet if Mr. Vaile's job was on the line, he would like to countenance THAT!!
Essentially he is saying that the possibility of the Company getting into financial difficulty is a real possibility, considering the amount of debt we will carry, and if that is the case, then...well...stiff bikkies. But hey, let's not mention the war, shall we?
How can we as taxpayers keep supporting these clowns
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JFK shuttles
What exactly is the problem with the JFK shuttles from a cabin crew perspective Roaming wolf?
(because I have never done one)
(because I have never done one)
Last edited by twiggs; 14th Feb 2007 at 03:51. Reason: added reason for question.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK Twiggs,
If you have not done a shuttle it’s hard to explain but most of the problem is getting a decent kip without chems before you leave and then it’s a long hard day even if the wheels do not fall off.
From lowerlobes post it looks like the techies reckon that if you fly to New York 24 hours off is not enough rest and they only go less than half way if you know what I mean.
Does that give you some idea of the day I mean it’s a long one
I reckon the point is that the pilots union has got them something and the faaa keeps on doing ehhh I'm trying to think here..baking muffins and not much else.
So why havent you done one Twiggs
If you have not done a shuttle it’s hard to explain but most of the problem is getting a decent kip without chems before you leave and then it’s a long hard day even if the wheels do not fall off.
From lowerlobes post it looks like the techies reckon that if you fly to New York 24 hours off is not enough rest and they only go less than half way if you know what I mean.
Does that give you some idea of the day I mean it’s a long one
I reckon the point is that the pilots union has got them something and the faaa keeps on doing ehhh I'm trying to think here..baking muffins and not much else.
So why havent you done one Twiggs
Last edited by roamingwolf; 14th Feb 2007 at 04:35. Reason: had another beer
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roamingwolf,
that answer I could have figured out myself, but has there been any real issues that have resulted in unsafe situations or OH&S issues?
The way I see it, it is just a hard day at the office with two 48 hr slips both sides of it.
I haven't done one because there is a seniority bidding system.
that answer I could have figured out myself, but has there been any real issues that have resulted in unsafe situations or OH&S issues?
The way I see it, it is just a hard day at the office with two 48 hr slips both sides of it.
I haven't done one because there is a seniority bidding system.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The JFK is one of the hardest patterns to get and highly sought after by crew. Many crew choosing to do them back to back.
According to the minutes of the OH&S Committee and discussing it with the Safety Department there hasnt been a single Hazard report written since the shuttle started.
Even when there have been delays only one crew in many delays have voted not to continue on the trip and complete the shuttle when they could have voted to get off the aircraft in NYC
In the case of the pilots. The workload for a 2 person crew is enormous in what is one of the busiest areas to fly in the world according to AIPA.
Whilst Lowerlobe is correct that the Trip is indeed arduous. the shuttle was agreed to by crew in a vote put by the FAAA to its members in order to try and hang onto some flying. Much of which is going to others who are infinitely more productive and more cost effective for the Company to use to crew flights.
As the FAAA has said continually the challenges for EBA8 are going to be about delivering flexiblity to get the work back and keep the A380 lest it and the future of long haul goes elsewhere.
Nobody who flies is happy with the reality of our situation. We just have to ensure that we dont go the way of the manufacturing industry and a range of others that were just undercut by cheaper labour.
According to the minutes of the OH&S Committee and discussing it with the Safety Department there hasnt been a single Hazard report written since the shuttle started.
Even when there have been delays only one crew in many delays have voted not to continue on the trip and complete the shuttle when they could have voted to get off the aircraft in NYC
In the case of the pilots. The workload for a 2 person crew is enormous in what is one of the busiest areas to fly in the world according to AIPA.
Whilst Lowerlobe is correct that the Trip is indeed arduous. the shuttle was agreed to by crew in a vote put by the FAAA to its members in order to try and hang onto some flying. Much of which is going to others who are infinitely more productive and more cost effective for the Company to use to crew flights.
As the FAAA has said continually the challenges for EBA8 are going to be about delivering flexiblity to get the work back and keep the A380 lest it and the future of long haul goes elsewhere.
Nobody who flies is happy with the reality of our situation. We just have to ensure that we dont go the way of the manufacturing industry and a range of others that were just undercut by cheaper labour.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twiggs
I was watching with interest your question to RW
I understand fully that you only believe it to be a hard day at the office because that’s where you are.
Not only that however but by your own admission you have not done a shuttle but proclaim them to be OK and safe…and you wonder why anyone doubts your stories
There are a number of problems here and we have talked about most of them before however this latest development by the tech crew puts a new slant on things.
The first is that because of the time difference between Syd and LA most crew do not indeed get much sleep before departure to JFK.This has been successfully argued by Tech crew as well.
The main point however is that our surrender artists in the FAAA encouraged crew to vote YES to doing a shuttle because they could not argue a case for retaining the slip.
The tech crew however, not only retained the slip but also have just proved that slipping for 24 hours is not enough!!!!!!!!!!!!
If the tech crew cannot achieve adequate rest during a 24-hour slip I think it would be fairly safe to say that we could argue that not having a slip is even more arduous.
By adding an additional crew member on the flight for tech crew the company has admitted that there is an issue with fatigue. If it were not then the company would not be putting another pilot on board…
AIPA sits down and fights for their members but not the FAAA.All we get from them is MUFFIN MORNINGS and a story as to how hard the company has it….
Maybe we should all join AIPA, as they seem to look after their members
I was watching with interest your question to RW
I understand fully that you only believe it to be a hard day at the office because that’s where you are.
Not only that however but by your own admission you have not done a shuttle but proclaim them to be OK and safe…and you wonder why anyone doubts your stories
There are a number of problems here and we have talked about most of them before however this latest development by the tech crew puts a new slant on things.
The first is that because of the time difference between Syd and LA most crew do not indeed get much sleep before departure to JFK.This has been successfully argued by Tech crew as well.
The main point however is that our surrender artists in the FAAA encouraged crew to vote YES to doing a shuttle because they could not argue a case for retaining the slip.
The tech crew however, not only retained the slip but also have just proved that slipping for 24 hours is not enough!!!!!!!!!!!!
If the tech crew cannot achieve adequate rest during a 24-hour slip I think it would be fairly safe to say that we could argue that not having a slip is even more arduous.
By adding an additional crew member on the flight for tech crew the company has admitted that there is an issue with fatigue. If it were not then the company would not be putting another pilot on board…
AIPA sits down and fights for their members but not the FAAA.All we get from them is MUFFIN MORNINGS and a story as to how hard the company has it….
Maybe we should all join AIPA, as they seem to look after their members
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Top of Descent
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lowerlobe Well said mate. And the Kiwis are back on the shuttle again so there goes the argument that voting yes to the shuttle would protect Aust LH jobs.
As for the muffin mornings what they're not telling us is that you have to bring your own muffins
Well said mate. And the Kiwis are back on the shuttle again so there goes the argument that voting yes to the shuttle would protect Aust LH jobs.As for the muffin mornings what they're not telling us is that you have to bring your own muffins
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: queensland
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its all about fatigue
Pegasus,
my understanding is the FAAA is there to protect its members and ensure our work is covered adequately by common sense safeguards.
Thats why we have a slipping formula, hours limitations and so on.
Unfortunately in some respects crew need to be saved from themselves.
Many crew bid back to back LAs, these cannot be healthy for you. One is bad enough let alone a roster full.
Some female crew will fly when they are pregnant. This is only my opinion but i can not believe that while a precious life is forming and in the early stages of its creation that we have mothers who will expose the foetus to flying in a pressurised environment, expose themselves to the air born bacteria that passengers bring onboard with them, the jetlag, the pushing and pulling of heavy carts, the lifting of passengers baggage, and in the worst case may have to block an exit with passengers attempting to get out in an emergency, oh not fogetting lugging a suitcase around every other day and the inability to have a rest should you for some unknown reason be feeling dam tired because your in the middle of a meal service somewhere in the AM somewhere around the world, somewhere at 30 000 feet.
sorry to ramble but i think you get the point.
The JFK shuttle should never have been put to a vote. Clearly there is a serious time change issue and clearly to have to operate a 15 plus hour day in the middle of an LA direct is not taking your memberships health and welfare into account.
As we know some crew are happy to fly 260 hrs a period if thay can. That doesnt mean its a good thing. The FAAA did the unconscionable by dangling dollars before the noses of greedy crew.
If the money wasnt there the sick leave would be very high. No one would do the shuttles.
The safety and health of the FAAA membership should be the highest priority and to compromise that because its all too hard to go to the commission and have a proper fatigue study on our job is very sad indeed. Even the Company now realises the ramifications and importance of fatigue.
MM had a fatigue study done on the LA and JFK shuttle.
It was by an academic who never actually flew, who used a computer model and some data to determine whether we would be fatigued or not. The long & short of it was it was determined we would be no more tired than on any other sector we flew. Incredible. He obviously didnt feel like many of us do when we have walked off the shuttle arriving back in LA.
Its time the FAAA did a proper fatigue study covering all aspects of our work using actual crew who can be monitored for approx 12 months taking into account everything that impacts us.
With carmen, new aircraft , growth in destinations and increased frequency to destinations flying is becoming harder not easier.
Lets see if the FAAA can be a leader in the world of aviation and not make excuses but carry out and complete an in-depth study that will harness the ever growing greed of the aviation industry and force it to give the health of its workforce a responsible priority.
The outcome may empower all aviation unions across the world.
Pegasus,
my understanding is the FAAA is there to protect its members and ensure our work is covered adequately by common sense safeguards.
Thats why we have a slipping formula, hours limitations and so on.
Unfortunately in some respects crew need to be saved from themselves.
Many crew bid back to back LAs, these cannot be healthy for you. One is bad enough let alone a roster full.
Some female crew will fly when they are pregnant. This is only my opinion but i can not believe that while a precious life is forming and in the early stages of its creation that we have mothers who will expose the foetus to flying in a pressurised environment, expose themselves to the air born bacteria that passengers bring onboard with them, the jetlag, the pushing and pulling of heavy carts, the lifting of passengers baggage, and in the worst case may have to block an exit with passengers attempting to get out in an emergency, oh not fogetting lugging a suitcase around every other day and the inability to have a rest should you for some unknown reason be feeling dam tired because your in the middle of a meal service somewhere in the AM somewhere around the world, somewhere at 30 000 feet.
sorry to ramble but i think you get the point.
The JFK shuttle should never have been put to a vote. Clearly there is a serious time change issue and clearly to have to operate a 15 plus hour day in the middle of an LA direct is not taking your memberships health and welfare into account.
As we know some crew are happy to fly 260 hrs a period if thay can. That doesnt mean its a good thing. The FAAA did the unconscionable by dangling dollars before the noses of greedy crew.
If the money wasnt there the sick leave would be very high. No one would do the shuttles.
The safety and health of the FAAA membership should be the highest priority and to compromise that because its all too hard to go to the commission and have a proper fatigue study on our job is very sad indeed. Even the Company now realises the ramifications and importance of fatigue.
MM had a fatigue study done on the LA and JFK shuttle.
It was by an academic who never actually flew, who used a computer model and some data to determine whether we would be fatigued or not. The long & short of it was it was determined we would be no more tired than on any other sector we flew. Incredible. He obviously didnt feel like many of us do when we have walked off the shuttle arriving back in LA.
Its time the FAAA did a proper fatigue study covering all aspects of our work using actual crew who can be monitored for approx 12 months taking into account everything that impacts us.
With carmen, new aircraft , growth in destinations and increased frequency to destinations flying is becoming harder not easier.
Lets see if the FAAA can be a leader in the world of aviation and not make excuses but carry out and complete an in-depth study that will harness the ever growing greed of the aviation industry and force it to give the health of its workforce a responsible priority.
The outcome may empower all aviation unions across the world.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reality Check
I note with interest some of the resurrected discussion on JFK shuttles.
I note that lowerlobe, particularly has embarked on his usual anti FAAA campaign. As i have said on varying ocassions, lowerlobe particuarly does not know what he is talking about. He is depressingly clueless and only knows to critise the FAAA like some fishwife.
Anyhow, back to why i have decided to contribute some more comments onto this highly unrepresentative forum. Regarding JFK, THE FOLLOWING POINTS ARE RELEVANT :
1) 71% OF CREW IN A DEMOCRATIC VOTE SUPPORTED THE SHUTTLES
2) CABIN CREW ARE NOT PILOTS. LONG HAUL CABIN CREW CAN BE SUBSTITUTED VERY EASILY (AND ARE BEING SUBSTITUTED BY THE COMPANY) BY OTHER QANTAS CABIN CREW WHO WILL DO ALL OF OUR WORK IF WE WISH TO RAISE OBJECTIONS.
3) JFK SHUTTLES ARE HIGHLY DESIRED TRIPS.
Hawkeye, i respect your comments and clearly understand your viewpoint, unlike lowerlobe you are not anti-union and your views have logic. However, the Company is not interested in fatigue studies. It will clearly give the JFK shuttles to others who will do the work, if we were to withdraw the dispensation.
THAT IS THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION, HOWEVER UNPALATABLE TO ANY OF US.
Shortly, there will be new owners of Qantas. This new group of owners will not be in the mood to "discuss" JFK shuttles that may be raised by the FAAA.
Fundamentally, the new owners will be going for our throats and indeed for others including the Pilots. I HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHAT I SAY, BUT THE FACT THAT THE pILOTS CANNOT EVEN GET AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COMPANY OVER THEIR SHORT HAUL AGREEMENT, WHERE DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR NEARLY A YEAR NOW, INDICATES THE AGGRESSIVE NATURE OF THE COMPANY.
No one will thank the FAAA, if it withdrew the JFK dispensation and the Company employed further overseas and then made Long Haul cabin crew COMPULSORILY REDUNDANT.
I am not being arrogant when i say that it is easy for people like lowerlobe who have minimal knowledge of the industrial laws or the industrial reality within Qantas, to attack the FAAA.
The long haul FAAA is the ONLY Qantas union constantly attacked by Geoff Dixon. This is because it stands up for the rights of its members. However. im sure the leadership of the L/H FAAA is not suicidal by embracing nonsense suggestions that emanate from individuals like lowerlobe.
TO DO SO WOULD LEAD TO DISASTER FOR LONG HAUL CREW.
I note that lowerlobe, particularly has embarked on his usual anti FAAA campaign. As i have said on varying ocassions, lowerlobe particuarly does not know what he is talking about. He is depressingly clueless and only knows to critise the FAAA like some fishwife.
Anyhow, back to why i have decided to contribute some more comments onto this highly unrepresentative forum. Regarding JFK, THE FOLLOWING POINTS ARE RELEVANT :
1) 71% OF CREW IN A DEMOCRATIC VOTE SUPPORTED THE SHUTTLES
2) CABIN CREW ARE NOT PILOTS. LONG HAUL CABIN CREW CAN BE SUBSTITUTED VERY EASILY (AND ARE BEING SUBSTITUTED BY THE COMPANY) BY OTHER QANTAS CABIN CREW WHO WILL DO ALL OF OUR WORK IF WE WISH TO RAISE OBJECTIONS.
3) JFK SHUTTLES ARE HIGHLY DESIRED TRIPS.
Hawkeye, i respect your comments and clearly understand your viewpoint, unlike lowerlobe you are not anti-union and your views have logic. However, the Company is not interested in fatigue studies. It will clearly give the JFK shuttles to others who will do the work, if we were to withdraw the dispensation.
THAT IS THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION, HOWEVER UNPALATABLE TO ANY OF US.
Shortly, there will be new owners of Qantas. This new group of owners will not be in the mood to "discuss" JFK shuttles that may be raised by the FAAA.
Fundamentally, the new owners will be going for our throats and indeed for others including the Pilots. I HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHAT I SAY, BUT THE FACT THAT THE pILOTS CANNOT EVEN GET AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COMPANY OVER THEIR SHORT HAUL AGREEMENT, WHERE DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR NEARLY A YEAR NOW, INDICATES THE AGGRESSIVE NATURE OF THE COMPANY.
No one will thank the FAAA, if it withdrew the JFK dispensation and the Company employed further overseas and then made Long Haul cabin crew COMPULSORILY REDUNDANT.
I am not being arrogant when i say that it is easy for people like lowerlobe who have minimal knowledge of the industrial laws or the industrial reality within Qantas, to attack the FAAA.
The long haul FAAA is the ONLY Qantas union constantly attacked by Geoff Dixon. This is because it stands up for the rights of its members. However. im sure the leadership of the L/H FAAA is not suicidal by embracing nonsense suggestions that emanate from individuals like lowerlobe.
TO DO SO WOULD LEAD TO DISASTER FOR LONG HAUL CREW.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guardian
Mate ,I’m glad you have come back because I was worried you might have dropped off the edge or something.
I had to laugh mate when you said “the long haul FAAA is the ONLY Qantas union constantly attacked by Geoff Dixon. This is because it stands up for the rights of its members”
Mate exactly WHEN was that.
Watch out Qantas …incoming muffin.
Pal as most of the time you only attack.As Hawke eye said most people are greedy and that is why the shuttle is popular.As Hawke said crew would do 260 hours a roster if they could and worry about their health later.
This thing is about the astronauts telling the company that they could not get enough rest in 24 hours after working about 7 hours.Mate it looks like the company has given them more crew or whatever because of the fatigue and then you say that the company are not interested in fatigue studies.
I tell you what pal if we could prove that the shuttle is too fatigueing and we are worried about the safety and health aspect and then tell them we know about the techy’s getting more crew because they are tired we would have a good case I reckon in court.
You have not even asked for separate transport in LAX on the way back and more often than not we have to wait for the astronauts and their bags.They wanted us to do the shuttle and you caved in and told us to do the same.
Mate lowerlobe might be anti faaa but he is only saying what the rest of us are thinking
Pathetic faaa
Mate ,I’m glad you have come back because I was worried you might have dropped off the edge or something.
I had to laugh mate when you said “the long haul FAAA is the ONLY Qantas union constantly attacked by Geoff Dixon. This is because it stands up for the rights of its members”
Mate exactly WHEN was that.
Watch out Qantas …incoming muffin.
Pal as most of the time you only attack.As Hawke eye said most people are greedy and that is why the shuttle is popular.As Hawke said crew would do 260 hours a roster if they could and worry about their health later.
This thing is about the astronauts telling the company that they could not get enough rest in 24 hours after working about 7 hours.Mate it looks like the company has given them more crew or whatever because of the fatigue and then you say that the company are not interested in fatigue studies.
I tell you what pal if we could prove that the shuttle is too fatigueing and we are worried about the safety and health aspect and then tell them we know about the techy’s getting more crew because they are tired we would have a good case I reckon in court.
You have not even asked for separate transport in LAX on the way back and more often than not we have to wait for the astronauts and their bags.They wanted us to do the shuttle and you caved in and told us to do the same.
Mate lowerlobe might be anti faaa but he is only saying what the rest of us are thinking
Pathetic faaa
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey we have all 3 amigo’s on the one day ,see what a bit of attention get’s you.I think it’s great to see all 3 of the FAAA leaders have come out.Well done!!!!!!!!
Not only that but we have the FAAA cheersquad Twiggs who has never done a JFK shuttle but seems to know that they are just hard work….
Brilliant but then again that’s the FAAA supporters for you,hardly a group of deep thinkers
It’s also laughable when you read some of the comments .Like RW my favourite is this one…
“The long haul FAAA is the ONLY Qantas union constantly attacked by Geoff Dixon. This is because it stands up for the rights of its members”
Like RW I would like to know when that happened,I must have been away that day.It seems as though the only thing the FAAA can do is wave a white flag and bend over.
but this one is too good to pass up on….
“He is depressingly clueless and only knows to critise the FAAA like some fishwife”
After reading that I think the only reason that Geoff Dixon attacks the FAAA is that they are clueless and he knows he can get away with it.Geoff probably does not like Muffins anyway….
What I want to know is what is a fishwife and what is a critise because apparently she/it knows how to do that?
I think these give us an idea at just how clueless the FAAA really are.
As far as a democratic vote is concerned it was about as democratic as North Korea.I suppose though that if you live in North Korea it would seem to be democratic and that is because like the FAAA the North Korean Gov tells them that it is democratic…So it must be.
The reality is though that the FAAA has no intention of standing up for it’s members.Although it is standing up for the company quite well…
Not only that but we have the FAAA cheersquad Twiggs who has never done a JFK shuttle but seems to know that they are just hard work….
Brilliant but then again that’s the FAAA supporters for you,hardly a group of deep thinkers
It’s also laughable when you read some of the comments .Like RW my favourite is this one…
“The long haul FAAA is the ONLY Qantas union constantly attacked by Geoff Dixon. This is because it stands up for the rights of its members”
Like RW I would like to know when that happened,I must have been away that day.It seems as though the only thing the FAAA can do is wave a white flag and bend over.
but this one is too good to pass up on….
“He is depressingly clueless and only knows to critise the FAAA like some fishwife”
After reading that I think the only reason that Geoff Dixon attacks the FAAA is that they are clueless and he knows he can get away with it.Geoff probably does not like Muffins anyway….
What I want to know is what is a fishwife and what is a critise because apparently she/it knows how to do that?
I think these give us an idea at just how clueless the FAAA really are.
As far as a democratic vote is concerned it was about as democratic as North Korea.I suppose though that if you live in North Korea it would seem to be democratic and that is because like the FAAA the North Korean Gov tells them that it is democratic…So it must be.
The reality is though that the FAAA has no intention of standing up for it’s members.Although it is standing up for the company quite well…