Trouble at Eastern/Qantaslink!
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Everyone,
I have looked everywhere for this statement from Geoff Dixon Re: Fixed Terms Contracts and Casuals. Could somebody please post it on here for the rest of us to see. I havent heard it on the news or seen it in the papers yet. So, I am not sure what all the talk is about.
But just to clarify a couple of things now, if you refer to your current EBA (VI) for QF Short Haul:
18. FIXED TERM FLIGHT ATTENDANTS
Provided that the appropriate mix of casuals and full time permanent flight attendants is meeting the operational requirements of Qantas, there will be no engagement of fixed term flight attendants during the term of this Agreement, unless otherwise agreed between the parties.
2. DURATION
This Agreement shall commence on 1 January 2003 and operate to 1 September 2005.
The effective date for the operation of each clause is the date of certification of this Agreement, unless provided otherwise.
It is important to remember that this is a rumour network and not to take all that is posted as gospel. Personally, I think speculating like this causes people to panic unnecessarily and that really isn't fair.
Happy flying
I have looked everywhere for this statement from Geoff Dixon Re: Fixed Terms Contracts and Casuals. Could somebody please post it on here for the rest of us to see. I havent heard it on the news or seen it in the papers yet. So, I am not sure what all the talk is about.
But just to clarify a couple of things now, if you refer to your current EBA (VI) for QF Short Haul:
18. FIXED TERM FLIGHT ATTENDANTS
Provided that the appropriate mix of casuals and full time permanent flight attendants is meeting the operational requirements of Qantas, there will be no engagement of fixed term flight attendants during the term of this Agreement, unless otherwise agreed between the parties.
2. DURATION
This Agreement shall commence on 1 January 2003 and operate to 1 September 2005.
The effective date for the operation of each clause is the date of certification of this Agreement, unless provided otherwise.
It is important to remember that this is a rumour network and not to take all that is posted as gospel. Personally, I think speculating like this causes people to panic unnecessarily and that really isn't fair.
Happy flying
Last edited by Qwannas; 25th Jun 2003 at 17:51.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: In a box, ready for shipping...
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just my two cents worth again...
It is my understanding the CP agreement is such that regional crew, when progressing to mainline, have to do so as permanent full time crew.
The only way a regional FA could gain a contract position as a fixed term FA would be if they applied to QF externally, gained a fixed term position, and then resigned from the regional airline starting afresh with no years of service accrued, etc.
Yes, Dixon has stated ad nauseam that recruitment in the future shall occur with casuals and fixed term contractors - however, the Agreements across each division protect those on CP from being offered anything less than permanent full time positions (and there always comes a time when the need for permanent full time crew occurs, as a means of provided QF with the ability to properly plan for the future).
Training FA's costs money - the ROI on a permanent full time FA is much better than on one employed for a fixed term only (although, there is the argument that by virtue of their permanent full time nature, they cost the company in other areas...but we won't go there!)
Am open to corrections, as I am not the messiah.
And Hear Hear Qwannas!
It is my understanding the CP agreement is such that regional crew, when progressing to mainline, have to do so as permanent full time crew.
The only way a regional FA could gain a contract position as a fixed term FA would be if they applied to QF externally, gained a fixed term position, and then resigned from the regional airline starting afresh with no years of service accrued, etc.
Yes, Dixon has stated ad nauseam that recruitment in the future shall occur with casuals and fixed term contractors - however, the Agreements across each division protect those on CP from being offered anything less than permanent full time positions (and there always comes a time when the need for permanent full time crew occurs, as a means of provided QF with the ability to properly plan for the future).
Training FA's costs money - the ROI on a permanent full time FA is much better than on one employed for a fixed term only (although, there is the argument that by virtue of their permanent full time nature, they cost the company in other areas...but we won't go there!)
Am open to corrections, as I am not the messiah.
And Hear Hear Qwannas!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peanut Pusher
Regional crew (being Eastern and Sunstate) will NEVER progress to QF under anything less than a permanent position as stated in the Career Progression Document there is no such provision for regional crew to progress into fixed term or contract positions and there is no such category within QF for "permanent under contract" they are two seperate categories of employment.
However, maybe Impulse crew may progress on different conditions such as contract but I doubt it, but they are not included in the Career Progression document recently signed by Qantas and the FAAA which is only for Eastern and Sunstate.
QWannas
Refer to the cabin crew website on the home page you will find "The Future of work - an address by Geoff Dixon" dated 16/6/03.
It states amoung other things that there will be a reduction in permanent employment and more fixed term and contract positions available however it clearly states in our EBA that this is not possible YET but Mr Dixon seems to think this is achievable.
However I have heard once again more rumours that MAM will engage contractors on a fixed term basis rather QF, can this happen under the terms of our EBA? Is this maybe how Mr Dixon will by-pass the unions as stated in his address and push forward with his plan?
Eastern and Sunstate crew dont be alarmed just sit tight and ride the storm out. Progression will happen these rumours come up several times a year and progression has been on-going now for many many years and I acknowledge that this is a different world BUT I believe the agreement will continue to be honoured.
Regional crew (being Eastern and Sunstate) will NEVER progress to QF under anything less than a permanent position as stated in the Career Progression Document there is no such provision for regional crew to progress into fixed term or contract positions and there is no such category within QF for "permanent under contract" they are two seperate categories of employment.
However, maybe Impulse crew may progress on different conditions such as contract but I doubt it, but they are not included in the Career Progression document recently signed by Qantas and the FAAA which is only for Eastern and Sunstate.
QWannas
Refer to the cabin crew website on the home page you will find "The Future of work - an address by Geoff Dixon" dated 16/6/03.
It states amoung other things that there will be a reduction in permanent employment and more fixed term and contract positions available however it clearly states in our EBA that this is not possible YET but Mr Dixon seems to think this is achievable.
However I have heard once again more rumours that MAM will engage contractors on a fixed term basis rather QF, can this happen under the terms of our EBA? Is this maybe how Mr Dixon will by-pass the unions as stated in his address and push forward with his plan?
Eastern and Sunstate crew dont be alarmed just sit tight and ride the storm out. Progression will happen these rumours come up several times a year and progression has been on-going now for many many years and I acknowledge that this is a different world BUT I believe the agreement will continue to be honoured.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi GalleyHag
I've read your comments and I have some thoughts.... maybe you or someone else out there can shed some light on them.
If Mr Dixon is trying to make the permanent workforce smaller and future recruitment is contractors/fixed termers etc then can contractors/fixed termers progress up the career ladder? For example, how do you progress to becoming a BusinessFirst F/A or CSM if you're only on a contract for 1-2 years?
How will this sort of thing work?
Thanks
vdd
I've read your comments and I have some thoughts.... maybe you or someone else out there can shed some light on them.
If Mr Dixon is trying to make the permanent workforce smaller and future recruitment is contractors/fixed termers etc then can contractors/fixed termers progress up the career ladder? For example, how do you progress to becoming a BusinessFirst F/A or CSM if you're only on a contract for 1-2 years?
How will this sort of thing work?
Thanks
vdd
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi VDD
Good question if that is the way of the future "contractors" maybe things will change but at present fixed-term crew or casuals cannot apply for positions such as BFirst or CSS or CSM and they also have to be interviewed for permanent positions they do not automatically get these either.
However, having said that I recall when the BFirst category was first being discussed for Long Haul Crew QF wanted to allocate 1 position on board to Bangkok or Auckland based "contract crew". I remember reading this somewhere I think from memory on the faaa (long haul) site. Now that BFirst has been introduced I am not sure what the outcome was but if it did go ahead it seems really unfair that only permanent Australian based crew could apply for these positions but Bangkok and Auckland contractors automatically received 1 available position on board. Maybe a long hauler could clarify if this is the case.
Furthermore if you are employed by MAM the QF line to everything I read on Galley Gossip (QF Cabin Crew Web site) is that MAM crew are not employees of QF therefore they do not even come into the equation in terms of promotions, staff travel etc.
You may also be interested to know that in these uncertain times when compulsory redundancy is being discussed all over the place that QF are not willing to shed their off shore labour being Bangkok and Auckland before Australian Based crew. The QF line is that contracts are in place for these crew and it would be expensive to get out of them BUT they are more than willing to force Australian based crew out of a job, but that is whole other story. Nothing has been confirmed in terms of CR and it may not even happen but am I the only 1 that thinks this is unreasonable?
Good question if that is the way of the future "contractors" maybe things will change but at present fixed-term crew or casuals cannot apply for positions such as BFirst or CSS or CSM and they also have to be interviewed for permanent positions they do not automatically get these either.
However, having said that I recall when the BFirst category was first being discussed for Long Haul Crew QF wanted to allocate 1 position on board to Bangkok or Auckland based "contract crew". I remember reading this somewhere I think from memory on the faaa (long haul) site. Now that BFirst has been introduced I am not sure what the outcome was but if it did go ahead it seems really unfair that only permanent Australian based crew could apply for these positions but Bangkok and Auckland contractors automatically received 1 available position on board. Maybe a long hauler could clarify if this is the case.
Furthermore if you are employed by MAM the QF line to everything I read on Galley Gossip (QF Cabin Crew Web site) is that MAM crew are not employees of QF therefore they do not even come into the equation in terms of promotions, staff travel etc.
You may also be interested to know that in these uncertain times when compulsory redundancy is being discussed all over the place that QF are not willing to shed their off shore labour being Bangkok and Auckland before Australian Based crew. The QF line is that contracts are in place for these crew and it would be expensive to get out of them BUT they are more than willing to force Australian based crew out of a job, but that is whole other story. Nothing has been confirmed in terms of CR and it may not even happen but am I the only 1 that thinks this is unreasonable?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SYD
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really
Galleyhag you seem to know alot about the mainline working conditions.
There is a position of permanent under a contract period, you invent it like BKK base & AKL base and implement it through a contract company.
Both are many years into there permanent contract jobs without any problems, some have just had there contracts renewed.
MAM is only the begining and phase 1 or many to come.
I've been in the recruitment team for 3 years and our last
interviews with the MAM people gave us an insight into our leaders future vision.
Take my word for it, all cabin crew will be on contracts within a decade.
You will have all the benifits of today but if you don't make the grade, ie poor performance or have excessive sick leave etc etc bye bye.
I know it's a bitter pill put Mr Dixon said to my face at the last management forum, he would be introducing these changes with or without union agreement.
It's just a fact of life, and when he was taken to task by many CSM's over it he said he replaced the "stop workers who took industrial action" in 16 hrs.
So the MAM people who jumped in and bowed down, you just cut your nose off, because you gave Mr. Dixon more power than ever and if you ever get a job it will be under much worse conditions than is in place today.
Qantas paid $90 million in allowances (quoted by Mr Dixon) to cabin crew last year. He see's this as a figure he can add to the bottom line within 5 years.
There is a position of permanent under a contract period, you invent it like BKK base & AKL base and implement it through a contract company.
Both are many years into there permanent contract jobs without any problems, some have just had there contracts renewed.
MAM is only the begining and phase 1 or many to come.
I've been in the recruitment team for 3 years and our last
interviews with the MAM people gave us an insight into our leaders future vision.
Take my word for it, all cabin crew will be on contracts within a decade.
You will have all the benifits of today but if you don't make the grade, ie poor performance or have excessive sick leave etc etc bye bye.
I know it's a bitter pill put Mr Dixon said to my face at the last management forum, he would be introducing these changes with or without union agreement.
It's just a fact of life, and when he was taken to task by many CSM's over it he said he replaced the "stop workers who took industrial action" in 16 hrs.
So the MAM people who jumped in and bowed down, you just cut your nose off, because you gave Mr. Dixon more power than ever and if you ever get a job it will be under much worse conditions than is in place today.
Qantas paid $90 million in allowances (quoted by Mr Dixon) to cabin crew last year. He see's this as a figure he can add to the bottom line within 5 years.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Peanut Pusher
I know so much about mainline as I have been a short haul flight attendant for some time now having progressed from EAA.
I appreciate that Bangkok and Auckland are many years into their contracts (I assume that is what you are referring to) but they are employed by labour hire companies and those companies have contracts with QF therefore it is possible that they would be given permanent positions for 3 years if that is the life of the contract with Qantas. I wouldnt consider a 3 year contract as permanent though.
What I was referring to in my earlier post was I didnt think there was such a category within QF itself being "permanent under contract" I know there is the ability to employ fixed term crew but I wouldnt call that permanent under contract maybe you could if you consider a 12 month fixed term permanent. Furthermore if you are a fixed term crew member you do not have the same rights as permanent crew.
My original post in regard to this issue related to the fact that you stated regional crew would progress into "permanent under contract" positions. This is clearly not true having just read a copy of the new "Career Progression Arrangements for Regional Airlines to the Short Haul Division of the Qantas Group" dated 9 May 2003 and signed off on 13 June, 2003. If you know something it is obvious from this agreement that Qantas, Eastern and FAAA are not aware of this as it clearly it states permanent not 1 mention of under contract or a time frame for their employment within the short haul division.
I am aware of Mr Dixons vision as per his speech "The Future of Work" dated 16/6/03. However, my question is how will he achieve this for current crew. Do you think current permanent crew something like 6000 or more between both divisions will agree to this? If we dont agree to this how does Mr Dixon aim to achieve his vision? I appreciate that future employment with QF can be through labour hire companies such as MAM but they will certainly not get the benefits of permanent crew as is already evidenced.
He may have replaced the striking crew within 16hours and there will always be 1000's of people out there willing to jump in while permanent crew are fighting for ours and their future.
You make it sound like we have no choice but to accept this "contracts" I am not having a go at you but what do you think is there anyway that you can see how this can be avoided?
I know so much about mainline as I have been a short haul flight attendant for some time now having progressed from EAA.
I appreciate that Bangkok and Auckland are many years into their contracts (I assume that is what you are referring to) but they are employed by labour hire companies and those companies have contracts with QF therefore it is possible that they would be given permanent positions for 3 years if that is the life of the contract with Qantas. I wouldnt consider a 3 year contract as permanent though.
What I was referring to in my earlier post was I didnt think there was such a category within QF itself being "permanent under contract" I know there is the ability to employ fixed term crew but I wouldnt call that permanent under contract maybe you could if you consider a 12 month fixed term permanent. Furthermore if you are a fixed term crew member you do not have the same rights as permanent crew.
My original post in regard to this issue related to the fact that you stated regional crew would progress into "permanent under contract" positions. This is clearly not true having just read a copy of the new "Career Progression Arrangements for Regional Airlines to the Short Haul Division of the Qantas Group" dated 9 May 2003 and signed off on 13 June, 2003. If you know something it is obvious from this agreement that Qantas, Eastern and FAAA are not aware of this as it clearly it states permanent not 1 mention of under contract or a time frame for their employment within the short haul division.
I am aware of Mr Dixons vision as per his speech "The Future of Work" dated 16/6/03. However, my question is how will he achieve this for current crew. Do you think current permanent crew something like 6000 or more between both divisions will agree to this? If we dont agree to this how does Mr Dixon aim to achieve his vision? I appreciate that future employment with QF can be through labour hire companies such as MAM but they will certainly not get the benefits of permanent crew as is already evidenced.
He may have replaced the striking crew within 16hours and there will always be 1000's of people out there willing to jump in while permanent crew are fighting for ours and their future.
You make it sound like we have no choice but to accept this "contracts" I am not having a go at you but what do you think is there anyway that you can see how this can be avoided?
Last edited by GalleyHag; 27th Jun 2003 at 19:54.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well!
So that's his next "five year plan", hey?
It sounds to me like young Geoffrey has underestimated his greatest asset - HIS STAFF !! (How unfortunate for him)
Next time you see him, Peanut Pusher, "Tell him he's dreaming!"
His big 'scheme' will turn pearshaped and will come back to bite him on his backside. He may have had things fall into his lap and perhaps that does make him feel almost a bit 'god-like' - but if he wants to go through with this fiasco it will give him a well deserved reality check!
In a nutshell, it wont work.
It sounds to me like young Geoffrey has underestimated his greatest asset - HIS STAFF !! (How unfortunate for him)
Next time you see him, Peanut Pusher, "Tell him he's dreaming!"
His big 'scheme' will turn pearshaped and will come back to bite him on his backside. He may have had things fall into his lap and perhaps that does make him feel almost a bit 'god-like' - but if he wants to go through with this fiasco it will give him a well deserved reality check!
In a nutshell, it wont work.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: In a box, ready for shipping...
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hear hear Qwannas
It is my understanding Geoff has ideas of grandure with regard to having all crew on contracts (if that is the case)...This aint Singapore and this is not SQ.
Qantas has turned consistent profits since Sept 11 and beyond. What other airline in this region (or for that matter in the world) has managed such performance? And could this have been achieved without permanent staff? I would think not - the permanent ranks provide stability by their presence.
Think of how much money is wasted on training school after training school (not to mention recruitment processes) to recruit contract workers. And if you still don't believe me, ask yourself this - why did Short Haul stop employing fixed term contractors? Could it have had something to do with the fact that they spent the first two months of their 6 month contract in training, with only 4 months return on investment?? Loss-maker!!
Anyway - my two cents, and I'm not always right.
It is my understanding Geoff has ideas of grandure with regard to having all crew on contracts (if that is the case)...This aint Singapore and this is not SQ.
Qantas has turned consistent profits since Sept 11 and beyond. What other airline in this region (or for that matter in the world) has managed such performance? And could this have been achieved without permanent staff? I would think not - the permanent ranks provide stability by their presence.
Think of how much money is wasted on training school after training school (not to mention recruitment processes) to recruit contract workers. And if you still don't believe me, ask yourself this - why did Short Haul stop employing fixed term contractors? Could it have had something to do with the fact that they spent the first two months of their 6 month contract in training, with only 4 months return on investment?? Loss-maker!!
Anyway - my two cents, and I'm not always right.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The new CP document has been signed for EAA and sunstate and it allows 18 EAA crew and 10 sunstate crew to progress across to mainline in the next groundschool.....however.......I have heard that EAA and sunstate will not let such large number leave the ranks in one hit as this will leave huge gaps to fill in rostering - has anyone else heard this ? ( this is purely just a rumour though )
and....well, as for Mr Dixon and his visions for the future..pppffft....I have lost all respect for him. Our company is ruined. There is no company culture, morale or happy staff anymore purely because Mr dixon doesn't care about his staff - profits come first. YOUR STAFF ARE YOUR AIRLINE MR DIXON - WITHOUT US THE FLYING KANGAROO WILL BE NO MORE.
I for one have had a big long think about where I want to spend the rest of my working years, and even though I am Qantas crazy and always have been I think my loyalty should now belong with a company that is going to show some loyalty to me and not make me feel so insecure coming to work everyday.
Maybe all us Eastern and Sunstate crew should jump ship to Emirates or Virgin Blue - we'd be snapped up for our enthusiasm, hard work, motivation and loyalty - and best of all, be rewarded for it.
sorry for rambling but dixon is ruining my future, i'm angry.
and....well, as for Mr Dixon and his visions for the future..pppffft....I have lost all respect for him. Our company is ruined. There is no company culture, morale or happy staff anymore purely because Mr dixon doesn't care about his staff - profits come first. YOUR STAFF ARE YOUR AIRLINE MR DIXON - WITHOUT US THE FLYING KANGAROO WILL BE NO MORE.
I for one have had a big long think about where I want to spend the rest of my working years, and even though I am Qantas crazy and always have been I think my loyalty should now belong with a company that is going to show some loyalty to me and not make me feel so insecure coming to work everyday.
Maybe all us Eastern and Sunstate crew should jump ship to Emirates or Virgin Blue - we'd be snapped up for our enthusiasm, hard work, motivation and loyalty - and best of all, be rewarded for it.
sorry for rambling but dixon is ruining my future, i'm angry.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vdd...
Can help you there. Positions like Customer Service Manager, Customer Service Supervisor, B-First and so on are only available to permanent staff. ie: you must be permanent to be eligible to apply. Hope this helps.
Can help you there. Positions like Customer Service Manager, Customer Service Supervisor, B-First and so on are only available to permanent staff. ie: you must be permanent to be eligible to apply. Hope this helps.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Bodum, GalleyHag and Peanut Pusher and others
Thanks for adding your comments to this.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the impression that I'm getting is that CSM, CSS and B-First F/As will be staffed by permanent crew and Economy Class will be made up with a mix of permanents and contractors.
When vacancies for the above higher-graded positions come up the permanents can apply and any new crew required to fill in the vacancies in Economy class will be contractors.
Is this how it's looking for the immediate future for cabin crew or have I misread things?
Thanks kindly
vdd
Thanks for adding your comments to this.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the impression that I'm getting is that CSM, CSS and B-First F/As will be staffed by permanent crew and Economy Class will be made up with a mix of permanents and contractors.
When vacancies for the above higher-graded positions come up the permanents can apply and any new crew required to fill in the vacancies in Economy class will be contractors.
Is this how it's looking for the immediate future for cabin crew or have I misread things?
Thanks kindly
vdd
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vdd.
Geoff Dixon hasnt stated that it will directly effect Cabin Crew. He stated that more than 95% of the Qantas workforce is made up of permanent staff and that this number needed to be reduced through the use of fixed term contracts/casuals. Im assuming therefore that not only will the ranks of Cabin Crew be affected, but so to customer service, etc.
So to answer your question. When permanent FAs "bid up" for CSM, CSS, B-First etc, they may very well be replaced by Fixed term contractors/Casuals working for QF or employed by Morris Alexander Management . (MAM) Will have to wait and see.
Hope this helps somewhat
Geoff Dixon hasnt stated that it will directly effect Cabin Crew. He stated that more than 95% of the Qantas workforce is made up of permanent staff and that this number needed to be reduced through the use of fixed term contracts/casuals. Im assuming therefore that not only will the ranks of Cabin Crew be affected, but so to customer service, etc.
So to answer your question. When permanent FAs "bid up" for CSM, CSS, B-First etc, they may very well be replaced by Fixed term contractors/Casuals working for QF or employed by Morris Alexander Management . (MAM) Will have to wait and see.
Hope this helps somewhat
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Vdd
No one really knows what is going to happen as it changes by the week but if Mr Dixon gets his way that is exactly what will happen.
But yes in long haul for example there are plenty of permanent crew that can take up the positions in BFirst, CSS and CSM and contractors can be brought in to operate in Y Class along with existing permanent crew.
In short haul you do not have to apply to work in Business therefore there are plenty of permanent crew to take up the position of CSM leaving future recruitment open to contractors.
I believe though that future "contractors" will certainly NOT be employed by QF they will be employed by labour hire companies like MAM and they will operate on contracts similar to the Bangkok and Auckland based contract crew in Long Haul, obviously though as they will be Australian based contract crew there conditions will be better than those which Bangkok and Auckland base crew work under.
No one really knows what is going to happen as it changes by the week but if Mr Dixon gets his way that is exactly what will happen.
But yes in long haul for example there are plenty of permanent crew that can take up the positions in BFirst, CSS and CSM and contractors can be brought in to operate in Y Class along with existing permanent crew.
In short haul you do not have to apply to work in Business therefore there are plenty of permanent crew to take up the position of CSM leaving future recruitment open to contractors.
I believe though that future "contractors" will certainly NOT be employed by QF they will be employed by labour hire companies like MAM and they will operate on contracts similar to the Bangkok and Auckland based contract crew in Long Haul, obviously though as they will be Australian based contract crew there conditions will be better than those which Bangkok and Auckland base crew work under.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi guys
Thanks for the extra input..... it makes a bit more sense to me now. Although as you mention, nobody really knows for sure what will happen and things change weekly!
Cheers
VDD
Thanks for the extra input..... it makes a bit more sense to me now. Although as you mention, nobody really knows for sure what will happen and things change weekly!
Cheers
VDD
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is turning into a a very interesting thread, as to the
direction QF mainline is heading, IMO I believe Geoff Dixon
is holding all the ace's, if you look at the subsiduaries Qantas
now runs, Jetconnect out of NZ, Impulse, and Australian
Airlines whose employees are all paid less than QF mainline,
it does not take rocket science to see these entities taking
more and more of the flying from mainline over the next few
years.
Dixon could turn the older 737s over to Impulse at anytime
of his choosing to take up a lot of the flying outside of the
CityFlyer routes, and the same for the shorter Asian
routes for Austalian Airlines, so the point being that if push
comes to shove Mr Dixon has many options at his disposal
to lower costs.
direction QF mainline is heading, IMO I believe Geoff Dixon
is holding all the ace's, if you look at the subsiduaries Qantas
now runs, Jetconnect out of NZ, Impulse, and Australian
Airlines whose employees are all paid less than QF mainline,
it does not take rocket science to see these entities taking
more and more of the flying from mainline over the next few
years.
Dixon could turn the older 737s over to Impulse at anytime
of his choosing to take up a lot of the flying outside of the
CityFlyer routes, and the same for the shorter Asian
routes for Austalian Airlines, so the point being that if push
comes to shove Mr Dixon has many options at his disposal
to lower costs.
