QANTAS - Australia IV
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bolty,
Thanks for your post and I appreciate your frustrations.The main problem is that cabin crew are hired for a number of reasons but technical ability is not one of them.We feel the same way when someone talks to us with absolutely no idea of what our job entails.
As Cartexchange has said the office goes on and on about the most idiotic of topics but something like this is not looked at and this is probably because the people in the office are not technically minded as well.
This is one of those things that should be brought up when the different departments are talking....whenever that happens.Engineering should show Lusley Grunt a few entries from the log and show her how they should be filled out.
Thanks for your post and I appreciate your frustrations.The main problem is that cabin crew are hired for a number of reasons but technical ability is not one of them.We feel the same way when someone talks to us with absolutely no idea of what our job entails.
As Cartexchange has said the office goes on and on about the most idiotic of topics but something like this is not looked at and this is probably because the people in the office are not technically minded as well.
This is one of those things that should be brought up when the different departments are talking....whenever that happens.Engineering should show Lusley Grunt a few entries from the log and show her how they should be filled out.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you sign on you are verifying that you have read these.
There are many copies of these in QCC1 and there is one in the blue folder for when you are on board.
There is also a paragraph in the technical section of the latest cabin crew news which basically says what Bolty has just mentioned.
You can access this from the cabin crew web site if you are not going to be in the office soon.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Bolty, this is not against you or those working hard to fix the fleet ... but how many times can you log something before just giving up?
My last sector there was an oven out and two coffee brewers out in the Y/C galley (744). A quick look at the log book and it had gone through SYD twice since the original notification - around about 12 sectors since they were first logged. No fix. It's just not important to the 'gingerbeers'. Was told on my last sector ex SIN 'We don t have the time to fix it, and it isnt gonna worry you that much is it?'
Yup, it gave us grief, as the punters didnt like the instant coffee they were served, and it slowed down the service to no-end.
A 744 that every sector for 8 sectors the area behind the Y/C galley flooded to the point we couldnt have pax sitting there. The engineer said ' Oh it's happened on this aircraft for a while now ... we cant work out why ... its a mystery!' What-the ???
And as with the IFE, most people dont bother logging it anymore, its just not worth the time to go and write in all the resets. It never gets fixed, so really, why bother?
Would love to see someone really actually fix things, rather than put it back on us. Half the things reported in the LOG you just get a 'tested - ops normal' from the engineers, and then you get the same problem next sector.
Myself, like many others, feel like the engineers dont believe us, or think we dont know how to work something when we log things.
I flew on an aircraft that for 6 sectors the main deck business class chillers were on but showing unusually high temperatures on the gauges .... each log entry about that had 'Tested - Ops Normal' written in the Log by engineers in each port. Thats great. But we have to re-stow all catering out of that area when we notice that the temperatures are outside the 'green band' (part of our procedures) this takes a hell of a lot of time and effort by the crew ...... and these things never get fixed !
I realise parts availability etc are not within the individual engineer's control ... but seriously, why would we bother logging anything when it seems to go on for months and months before (if ever) being fixed? We have already struggled through a 14 hour sector appologising to pax for some defect, that was originally flagged to engineering 12 sectors ago! Why bother
But thanks for your tuition on filling out a log book
My last sector there was an oven out and two coffee brewers out in the Y/C galley (744). A quick look at the log book and it had gone through SYD twice since the original notification - around about 12 sectors since they were first logged. No fix. It's just not important to the 'gingerbeers'. Was told on my last sector ex SIN 'We don t have the time to fix it, and it isnt gonna worry you that much is it?'
Yup, it gave us grief, as the punters didnt like the instant coffee they were served, and it slowed down the service to no-end.
A 744 that every sector for 8 sectors the area behind the Y/C galley flooded to the point we couldnt have pax sitting there. The engineer said ' Oh it's happened on this aircraft for a while now ... we cant work out why ... its a mystery!' What-the ???
And as with the IFE, most people dont bother logging it anymore, its just not worth the time to go and write in all the resets. It never gets fixed, so really, why bother?
Would love to see someone really actually fix things, rather than put it back on us. Half the things reported in the LOG you just get a 'tested - ops normal' from the engineers, and then you get the same problem next sector.
Myself, like many others, feel like the engineers dont believe us, or think we dont know how to work something when we log things.
I flew on an aircraft that for 6 sectors the main deck business class chillers were on but showing unusually high temperatures on the gauges .... each log entry about that had 'Tested - Ops Normal' written in the Log by engineers in each port. Thats great. But we have to re-stow all catering out of that area when we notice that the temperatures are outside the 'green band' (part of our procedures) this takes a hell of a lot of time and effort by the crew ...... and these things never get fixed !
I realise parts availability etc are not within the individual engineer's control ... but seriously, why would we bother logging anything when it seems to go on for months and months before (if ever) being fixed? We have already struggled through a 14 hour sector appologising to pax for some defect, that was originally flagged to engineering 12 sectors ago! Why bother
But thanks for your tuition on filling out a log book
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: mascot
Age: 57
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you just gotta laugh when you read some of the posts here and then the same person asks why others think that they work in the office..but hey as seinfeld said "but not that there is anything wrong with that".
or maybe the latest cabin crew news is being posted here on pprune and i reckon more people would read it here than the official one.but the cc news is good for one thing i reckon and thats if you are having trouble getting some shut eye in a slip port you can always read one and your out like a flash and there is no need for chems.
see the office does care about us
or maybe the latest cabin crew news is being posted here on pprune and i reckon more people would read it here than the official one.but the cc news is good for one thing i reckon and thats if you are having trouble getting some shut eye in a slip port you can always read one and your out like a flash and there is no need for chems.
see the office does care about us
Join Date: May 2005
Location: crew rest
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks twiggs
I have been on holidays and it was my first trip back.
Still there was nothing in the blue folder on board.
Crew had no idea!
I know we are supposed to have read the CSO, but who does?
I will definitely read them on board, but I will be dammed if I have to sign on 10 to 15 mins earlier for catch up on documentation.
However if they pay me for it I have no problems.
Please tell me how many people that work in the office come in 15 minutes earlier to catch up on all their procedures.
How are things in the office twiggs? have you got any more scoops for us!
I have been on holidays and it was my first trip back.
Still there was nothing in the blue folder on board.
Crew had no idea!
I know we are supposed to have read the CSO, but who does?
I will definitely read them on board, but I will be dammed if I have to sign on 10 to 15 mins earlier for catch up on documentation.
However if they pay me for it I have no problems.
Please tell me how many people that work in the office come in 15 minutes earlier to catch up on all their procedures.
How are things in the office twiggs? have you got any more scoops for us!
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just been over at D & G as I find that the topics are more stimulating.
I've come back to see if there is any development with the engineering issue and guess what .........it looks as though nothing has changed here.
Just one question though Twiggs ...Are you related to Sunfish by any chance?
Now don't lose the plot as this is not meant to be divisive or insulting but just an observation.
Now I can see what the others here are saying as you have to admit Sunfish..sorry Twiggs that your post does sound as though it has come straight out of the office especially the bit about you are required to read these before signing on.
I can almost hear the typing of the complaint email to tightslot as I post this..
Now back to the matter at hand...Has anyone else heard the rumour that the company has or is going to install IFE equipment by Panasonic on future aircraft.This is not to be construed in any way as a paid endorsement of any company and I am not gaining financially in any way from this rumour.
I've come back to see if there is any development with the engineering issue and guess what .........it looks as though nothing has changed here.
Just one question though Twiggs ...Are you related to Sunfish by any chance?
Now don't lose the plot as this is not meant to be divisive or insulting but just an observation.
Now I can see what the others here are saying as you have to admit Sunfish..sorry Twiggs that your post does sound as though it has come straight out of the office especially the bit about you are required to read these before signing on.
I can almost hear the typing of the complaint email to tightslot as I post this..
Now back to the matter at hand...Has anyone else heard the rumour that the company has or is going to install IFE equipment by Panasonic on future aircraft.This is not to be construed in any way as a paid endorsement of any company and I am not gaining financially in any way from this rumour.
Last edited by lowerlobe; 31st Jan 2007 at 23:25. Reason: additional info
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: OZ
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone else heard the rumour that the company has or is going to install IFE equipment by Panasonic on future aircraft
One problem, SIA have this system fitted to there latest 777-300ER and has huge reliability issues at the moment but prior to this Matsu****a have been the IFE system of choice.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: OZ
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cart.. Allow me to retort...
Answer. The reason any galley floods is due to blocked drains due to someone with the same mentality that was flushing blankets. In recent weeks this kind of event has been increasing. Only CC to blame there.
This is one of the reasons for the new cabin log as dedicated people will monitor defered/known faults so they get fixed
SIN/BKK/HKG does not have parts or time. Get over it and make sure the defect is written up into a port with ground time and it will be actioned.
Its your job
I hate to say it but this could easily be attributed to L/H CC personalities.
Many come across as whingers and wow is me types.
A 744 that every sector for 8 sectors the area behind the Y/C galley flooded to the point we couldnt have pax sitting there. The engineer said ' Oh it's happened on this aircraft for a while now ... we cant work out why ... its a mystery!' What-the ?
My last sector there was an oven out and two coffee brewers out in the Y/C galley (744). A quick look at the log book and it had gone through SYD twice since the original notification..Was told on my last sector ex SIN 'We don t have the time to fix it,
SIN/BKK/HKG does not have parts or time. Get over it and make sure the defect is written up into a port with ground time and it will be actioned.
but seriously, why would we bother logging anything when it seems to go on for months and months before (if ever) being fixed?
Myself, like many others, feel like the engineers dont believe us, or think we dont know how to work something when we log things
Many come across as whingers and wow is me types.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be careful who you bag there Bolty.
The person who's post you are refering to is LHR base.......
I hate to say it, but your posts indicate that you might be just a little bit precious.
The person who's post you are refering to is LHR base.......
I hate to say it, but your posts indicate that you might be just a little bit precious.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's an interesting article on the state of the take over and sme questions that should be answered.
Sell-off deal demands full disclosure
It's time for a public debate on the privatisation of our national airline, writes Glenda Korporaal
February 02, 2007
THE $11 billion private equity bid for Qantas will be a boon for Qantas shareholders and the highly paid investors and advisers on the deal. But as the group of high-powered, private equity players calling itself Airline Partners Australia prepares to release its formal statement to shareholders, and the clock ticks on the deal it hopes to wrap up in April, it's time for a broader public debate about the serious implications of the proposed privatisation of our national airline.
At the moment, the bidders maintain there is no legal reason for them to apply for approval under the Foreign Takeovers Act - and maybe that gives some indication as to how they may approach further deals with government if they succeed in taking Qantas private. Advised by highly paid lobbyists and advisers, they are co-operating behind the scenes, briefing ministers and government departments.
Their affable spokesman, Bob Mansfield, whose resume includes running food company McDonald's, phone company Optus and a short period as chief executive of the Fairfax media group, has been on an almost continuous loop in the media explaining that the consortium can think of nothing better than to back Qantas chief Geoff Dixon and his management team.
But we already have Dixon and his team running Qantas. So how does Mansfield and his private equity backers - the ubiquitous Macquarie Bank, Allco Finance, Allco Equity Partners, the San Francisco-based Texas Pacific Group and Canada's Onex - plan to make a profit by paying $11million for a company that was valued at only $6 billion on the stock market not too long ago? As the chairman of the $10billion Industry Funds Management, Garry Weaven (someone who has been a strong supporter of the positive potential for private equity in some circumstances in the past) has pointed out this week, there must be more to the deal and their plans for Qantas than we know.
One thing is clear. Once the deal is done, there will be no stopping Qantas's new private equity investors and the newly incentivised Qantas management team from putting their heads down and doing their darndest to make the most money out of the airline they can before getting it ready to sell off at an even higher price a few years down the track.
You only have to look at how Macquarie Airports has pushed up charges at Sydney airport and made a host of changes such as making it more difficult to drop off passengers (to force people to pay for parking).
If the Treasurer, other government ministers and federal politicians who go back to work in Canberra next week have any misgivings or need any formal assurances about what is going to happen to Qantas in a brave new world of privatisation, it's time to speak now or forever hold their peace. Politicians, central bankers and union leaders around the world are only just coming to grips with the rising tide of multi-billion dollar private equity deals sweeping the world.
In the US, a similar deal of national consequence would have already prompted a proactivist politician into calling public hearings on the matter, calling on the protagonists to give evidence on the public record.
With Qantas, all we have at the moment - apart from the carefully crafted public relations spiel - are private discussions being held behind closed doors.
There are some companies, such as Myer, which can be shaken up and revitalised under the attention of private equity ownership. But Qantas is no ordinary Australian company. Nor is it a bankrupt or badly run organisation desperately in need of a good shake-up and reorganisation. For those politicians still struggling tocome to terms with private equity, here is a starter list of 10 questions toask:
* 1. Hoes does APA plan to make a profit out of the deal?
* 2. How long does it plan to own Qantas?
* 3. What are its plans for Qantas employees?
* 4. What is the experience of major investor Texas Pacific in the airlines it has invested in?
* 5. What is the structure of the deal? Does it involve use of offshore tax havens? Qantas shareholders will have to pay capital gains tax on the profits they make from selling to APA. Will APA also pay capital gains tax on the profits they make on the sale of Qantas? Politicians should look closely at the present controversies in Korea where it has emerged that private equity firms - including Texas Pacific - have made big profits on buying and selling once-ailing Korean financial organisations.
* 6. How much money will the advisers make on the deal?
* 7. How much money do senior Qantas management stand to make out of the deal? Geoff Dixon has said he will give a possible $60million in compensation he could receive to charity. How much do other senior Qantas executives stand to make?
* 8. What are the potential conflicts between Macquarie Airports owning Sydney airport and having a key stake in Qantas? What safeguards will be in place to stop it working to ensure that Qantas gets the best deal at Sydney airport and its rivals get a raw deal? And what is to stop Qantas favouring Sydney airport over other airports for its services?
* 9. What will happen to the regional routes in Australia that Qantas presently serves?
* 10. What protections are there for Qantas frequent flyer holders?
It may be that the APA deal produces a leaner, slicker, more aggressive Qantas which thrives on doing its own thing, away from the annoying glare of the public spotlight and the scrutiny of being a publicly listed company.
But in the few weeks before the ideal becomes a reality, the Government and our politicians owe it to the Australian public to get some serious, binding, public assurances about what the consortium really plans for Qantas.
Interesting article ,don't you think.
Twiggs and others ,here is another invitation to post a constructive post..what do you think about the takeover and how it is being structured?
Sell-off deal demands full disclosure
It's time for a public debate on the privatisation of our national airline, writes Glenda Korporaal
February 02, 2007
THE $11 billion private equity bid for Qantas will be a boon for Qantas shareholders and the highly paid investors and advisers on the deal. But as the group of high-powered, private equity players calling itself Airline Partners Australia prepares to release its formal statement to shareholders, and the clock ticks on the deal it hopes to wrap up in April, it's time for a broader public debate about the serious implications of the proposed privatisation of our national airline.
At the moment, the bidders maintain there is no legal reason for them to apply for approval under the Foreign Takeovers Act - and maybe that gives some indication as to how they may approach further deals with government if they succeed in taking Qantas private. Advised by highly paid lobbyists and advisers, they are co-operating behind the scenes, briefing ministers and government departments.
Their affable spokesman, Bob Mansfield, whose resume includes running food company McDonald's, phone company Optus and a short period as chief executive of the Fairfax media group, has been on an almost continuous loop in the media explaining that the consortium can think of nothing better than to back Qantas chief Geoff Dixon and his management team.
But we already have Dixon and his team running Qantas. So how does Mansfield and his private equity backers - the ubiquitous Macquarie Bank, Allco Finance, Allco Equity Partners, the San Francisco-based Texas Pacific Group and Canada's Onex - plan to make a profit by paying $11million for a company that was valued at only $6 billion on the stock market not too long ago? As the chairman of the $10billion Industry Funds Management, Garry Weaven (someone who has been a strong supporter of the positive potential for private equity in some circumstances in the past) has pointed out this week, there must be more to the deal and their plans for Qantas than we know.
One thing is clear. Once the deal is done, there will be no stopping Qantas's new private equity investors and the newly incentivised Qantas management team from putting their heads down and doing their darndest to make the most money out of the airline they can before getting it ready to sell off at an even higher price a few years down the track.
You only have to look at how Macquarie Airports has pushed up charges at Sydney airport and made a host of changes such as making it more difficult to drop off passengers (to force people to pay for parking).
If the Treasurer, other government ministers and federal politicians who go back to work in Canberra next week have any misgivings or need any formal assurances about what is going to happen to Qantas in a brave new world of privatisation, it's time to speak now or forever hold their peace. Politicians, central bankers and union leaders around the world are only just coming to grips with the rising tide of multi-billion dollar private equity deals sweeping the world.
In the US, a similar deal of national consequence would have already prompted a proactivist politician into calling public hearings on the matter, calling on the protagonists to give evidence on the public record.
With Qantas, all we have at the moment - apart from the carefully crafted public relations spiel - are private discussions being held behind closed doors.
There are some companies, such as Myer, which can be shaken up and revitalised under the attention of private equity ownership. But Qantas is no ordinary Australian company. Nor is it a bankrupt or badly run organisation desperately in need of a good shake-up and reorganisation. For those politicians still struggling tocome to terms with private equity, here is a starter list of 10 questions toask:
* 1. Hoes does APA plan to make a profit out of the deal?
* 2. How long does it plan to own Qantas?
* 3. What are its plans for Qantas employees?
* 4. What is the experience of major investor Texas Pacific in the airlines it has invested in?
* 5. What is the structure of the deal? Does it involve use of offshore tax havens? Qantas shareholders will have to pay capital gains tax on the profits they make from selling to APA. Will APA also pay capital gains tax on the profits they make on the sale of Qantas? Politicians should look closely at the present controversies in Korea where it has emerged that private equity firms - including Texas Pacific - have made big profits on buying and selling once-ailing Korean financial organisations.
* 6. How much money will the advisers make on the deal?
* 7. How much money do senior Qantas management stand to make out of the deal? Geoff Dixon has said he will give a possible $60million in compensation he could receive to charity. How much do other senior Qantas executives stand to make?
* 8. What are the potential conflicts between Macquarie Airports owning Sydney airport and having a key stake in Qantas? What safeguards will be in place to stop it working to ensure that Qantas gets the best deal at Sydney airport and its rivals get a raw deal? And what is to stop Qantas favouring Sydney airport over other airports for its services?
* 9. What will happen to the regional routes in Australia that Qantas presently serves?
* 10. What protections are there for Qantas frequent flyer holders?
It may be that the APA deal produces a leaner, slicker, more aggressive Qantas which thrives on doing its own thing, away from the annoying glare of the public spotlight and the scrutiny of being a publicly listed company.
But in the few weeks before the ideal becomes a reality, the Government and our politicians owe it to the Australian public to get some serious, binding, public assurances about what the consortium really plans for Qantas.
Interesting article ,don't you think.
Twiggs and others ,here is another invitation to post a constructive post..what do you think about the takeover and how it is being structured?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: australia
Age: 59
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
faults of all types
even onboard managers can't seem to agree what
correct procedure before ife resets are made i.e. logon.
as for filling out ccl i feel it is a waste of time when
fixes are not made when a/c transit sydney what is the
point of documenting them upline.
so i have a poor attitude but i have a feeling i am not
alone and mgnt don't seem to care so why should i.
once the takeover is complete it is extremely unlikely
that conditions of any type will get better. guess all of
us including engineers will continue the downhill slide.
correct procedure before ife resets are made i.e. logon.
as for filling out ccl i feel it is a waste of time when
fixes are not made when a/c transit sydney what is the
point of documenting them upline.
so i have a poor attitude but i have a feeling i am not
alone and mgnt don't seem to care so why should i.
once the takeover is complete it is extremely unlikely
that conditions of any type will get better. guess all of
us including engineers will continue the downhill slide.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You asked a question Lowerlobe.....
The buyout is about nothing more than money.
1.Macquarie Bank gain to milk AUD $400 million in fees for there part in the transaction.
2.Qantas senior executives get to divvy up AUD $110 million dollars amongst themselves for just being there.
3. The shareholders get a fat capital gain on their shares.
In return for this Qantas has to deal with an almost threefold increase in the debt it has to service out of operating profit.
Debt goes from AUD $5 billion to around AUD $13 billion.
I wonder who the new owners are going to come after in an effort to get their 20% return on investment
johnnies IR laws will see to that..........
1.Macquarie Bank gain to milk AUD $400 million in fees for there part in the transaction.
2.Qantas senior executives get to divvy up AUD $110 million dollars amongst themselves for just being there.
3. The shareholders get a fat capital gain on their shares.
In return for this Qantas has to deal with an almost threefold increase in the debt it has to service out of operating profit.
Debt goes from AUD $5 billion to around AUD $13 billion.
I wonder who the new owners are going to come after in an effort to get their 20% return on investment
johnnies IR laws will see to that..........
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll spell it out for you.
They are going to use the powers granted business by the howard govenment's "work-no-choices" legislation to slash, rip, tear, and destroy the conditions of it's workforce thereby increasing the profitability of the company.
This increased profitability comes at the expense of it's workforce.
It's what corporate raiders do, silly.
This increased profitability comes at the expense of it's workforce.
It's what corporate raiders do, silly.