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.

The cabin/IFE log was outlined in a recent Cabin Standing Order.
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.

10/10
 

Well done Twiggs.

I'm nominating you for eXcel.

You're well ahead of the game.

Thanks for your update:ok:

Unless i'm colour blind the CSO's (Cabin Standing Orders) are in a green folder.

The blue folder is just for documentation eg. ICAN's etc...

Thanks sydney s/h, I stand corrected.

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 ???:confused:

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 :ugh:

But thanks for your tuition on filling out a log book :rolleyes:

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

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'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.

Panasonic = Matsu!!!!a latest system is to be fitted to the A380.

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.

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.

Be careful who you bag there Bolty.

The person who's post you are refering to is LHR base.......:ok:

I hate to say it, but your posts indicate that you might be just a little bit precious.

Dont get me started on the CSMs out of LHR :ok:

I wasn't bagging anyone just passing on a perception. :)

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?

labour?
 

so what about rod eddington teaming up with the labour party.

Isnt rod part of the big take over bid?

how would that sit with people?

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.

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 :rolleyes::yuk: :yuk:

johnnies IR laws will see to that..........

i dont get why they're going to buy a company that will be 13 billion in debt... does it make much sence? or am i missing something...:bored:

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.

ahh.. makes sence now.

Good for you.

Now, back to idol.:ok:

ha!... there is nothing wrong with idol thank you... depends which country your in... but some (i.e. 2 in the whole world?) have made a career out of it. and good on them.

What did idol have to do with me asking why a company would buy another company for $11b and then going into $13b debt anyway?

Nothing PER210, just ignore me.

Appologies for my mistake in a previous post re the AUD $110 million dollar figure that I quoted would be "creamed" by Qantas senior executives upon the sale.

It seems the figure is AUD $160 million. :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/...919530064.html

Speedbird...

The part that I thought was interesting was that APA is happy with the current management.

However as the article said we ALREADY have Darth and Co so why do we need the new owners and their debt level?

Banks and Equity funds do not buy a company because they want to play with planes ,they do it because they can see a profit in it.

The only question is HOW?

The fact that the company will be de registered gives us a clue.
You only have to look at how Mac bank runs Sydney airport and the increased charges to have an idea of what they are thinking.

The article also points out that equity groups focus on company's that are poorly run and losing money.the takeover group comes in with a broom and revitalises it .They then set about making a good turn over and then sell it for a huge profit compared to the investment .

The only flaw with this is that QF is not making a loss and in fact is making a huge profit.BA was rapt when they made around $1,3 billion but we are making close to that with a lot smaller fleet.

These are some of the points that I believe that a public hearing should be asked as well as why the board is entitled to anything let alone 160 million just to say YES.The board is paid well enough and some would say excessively already and I don't see why they are entitled to anything more than their normal packages.

I have rung my local Federal rep and after 3 weeks has not returned my call.

This is without a doubt the most momentus event in our careers and some who post here don't have anything to say.

This is like rotting fish at low tide ,it smells !

There are a number of VERY interesting articles in todays AUSTRALIAN newspaper (Sat). Most of which will not please APA,Darth or our illustrious PM.

The momentum is building....

Does anyone know if the FAAA has held meetings with either the new would -be owners or the company lately ?

Pleeeeze explain???
 

What I don't get in all this Equity bit is why the TOP 36 EXEC'S get special mention /treatment , then can potentially make a motza after we are refloated in 5 years or so ???

What have this ramshackle gaggle done to contribute to the success of the Rat ?

Only last week we had 2 TOP EXEC'S ( yeah right !! ) on board going up to HKG.

They both sat in their seats in P/C like zombies. Made no eye contact with the crew, did not speak to the crew and when the CSM had the audacity to ENGAGE on e of them as he exited the Loo , his reply was:

"I do not want to talk about it ( the Equity buy out ) on board.

WHY THE HELL NOT ???? YOU ARE PROBABLY GOING TO PAY OFF MORE THAN YOUR MORTGAGE AFTER THIS ........YOU CLOWN !!!
Thats what really sticks in my craw in this and other assorted "changes" that we've been subjected to over the years.

"You the worker do your menial tasks ( serve tea /coffee and clean toilets ) and leave the big issues to us" ( Management) !!!!!

Well , we've got news for you. The vast majority of organisations with "engaged" profitable workforces ( eg HP, Bendigo Bank, Cisco) all have flat management structures that are INCLUSIVE of the worker NOT "divide & conquer" based on some feudal system in the 18th Century.

The classic recent example is ( dare I bore you all ) the IFE.

We told "management" at least 18 months ago that it is just not good enough to load up 300/400 pax on an AC for 14 hours after they have paid for the IFE only for it to lurch and whine and collapse leaving the mess to us to clean up.( This is in breach of Trade Practices legislation)

"Oh no , we'll just put in a new patch" said management.

............FOR F--KS SAKE !!!!:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

These are the same people who are part of the "gang of 36".

Go figure.?


Rant over.

Time to put $50 each way on the 5th at Rosehill:sad: :sad:

As for the FAAA, haven't heard much from them on this BIG issue.

oh./............ but the cart tops are fixed:D

Stubby ,

I could not agree more and as usual it is a case of “do as we say not as we do” .

However there is a growing concern regarding not only the amount but the fact that management is being paid to say yes.

As one article said if this was the US there would be a call from congress or similar to have a public hearing so that the consortium would have to answer questions and not behind closed doors.

Not to worry about the FAAA though because it appears as though they are right on the ball as you can read with the latest newsletter ….

“Muffin Morning Is Back! (QF) (AO) (JQ)”

I wonder whether Bob Mansfield would prefer a muffin or a Krispy Kreme Donut....I can imagine Darth is sweating over this latest tactical move by the FAAA.

Backbenchers spooked
 

After reading the papers today, I get the feeling that this is not a

DONE DEAL.

Parliament is back in session next week and like all good pollies they can sense that Johnnie is feeling a tad stressed with Big Kev in the saddle.

What better than to have a Senate inquiry into Qantas?

What with the Freight scam this week, the ALLCO bully show yesterday, who knows

.....it ain't over 'till the fat lady sings:uhoh:

Speaking of FAT. I'll be requesting that the FAAA supply (paid from our Union fees) low-fat Muffins for the morning teas........not the usuals from the Pie Shop up the road from their bunker.:yuk:

By the way Lobe I have heard that Darth loves MUFF ins with his beverage of choice.:hmm:

The company apparently has a new PR company in Mascot...

Today was a very interesting afternoon as guess who was on 2UE?

None other than our fearless FAAA official Sven Reeder.

The funny thing was that old sven put the image across that as crew we deal with a number of issues but not too many problems with the IFE.....WTF

Steve are you really that scared of the company and did not want to upset them too much.....YOU had a golden opportunity and not only blew it but confirmed my suspicions of the FAAA.

The last trip I did the IFE failed on 3 out of 4 sectors and our friend Steve tells everyone their is not much really wrong with it....

We had a perfect opportunity to put pressure on the company and what happens......The FAAA caves in and bends over once again?

With a union like this we really don't need the company to stuff us up.

How many dispensations are you guys planning on giving away this year boy's...

The FAAA have MUFFIN MORNINGS though...That will fix them ;)

NICE ONE STEVE :rolleyes:

"......who listens to the radiO "?
 

I didn't hear the interview on 2UE,,,,,,.......

But really, Saturday afternoon radio is not a ratings bonanza.

Demographic=60+ pensioners who shuttle between 2KY and their medicine cupboard!!!

Must of been a really absorbing interview;)

Try these links............
 

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/...788739705.html

http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Content...loads/H7S7G3B2

http://www.etravelblackboard.com/ind...id=60911&nav=2

www.news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=170480

http://www.smarthouse.com.au/?Articl...ature/T5A3H7J3

http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Content...loads/T5A3H7J3

My appologies again......
 

It seems the pigs running Qantas stand to make far more than AUD $160 million if the sale goes ahead.

More like AUD $364 million. :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...-16942,00.html

Thanks Speedbird
 

This is getting worse by the minute.

Time to fire off yet another e-mail to my local member:hmm:

How do these filth sleep at night......?
 

Air rage prompts Qantas action
 

Air rage prompts Qantas action
February 4, 2007

A CRISIS meeting between Qantas managers and air crews will be held tomorrow after breakdowns in the airline's multimillion-dollar entertainment system sparked a passenger backlash.

The Flight Attendants Association of Australia has formally complained of cabin crew exhibiting "stress related problems" caused by aggressive passengers.

The entertainment system failure is affecting 27 aircraft in Qantas's Boeing 747-400 fleet and 10 Airbus A330-300 planes, prompting the airline to form a team to fix problems in the audio- and video-on-demand system, which has left passengers without movies, music and other entertainment for extended periods of their flights.

The airline has agreed to a request by FAA president Steven Reed for a meeting with Qantas general manager of aviation health services Ion Morrison and Qantas occupational health and safety committee chairman Michael Von Reth to devise a strategy to help staff cope with the air rage incidents.

A spokesman for Qantas said the airline had dedicated additional people, components and technical expertise to fix the problem.

"We are confident it will be fixed soon. [System supplier] Rockwell Collins is fully aware of the importance of this issue to Qantas," he said.

"We take any concerns raised by crew seriously. This meeting reaffirms the support services we have available."

He said the airline was not contemplating replacing the troubled system.

Passenger Ray Stephens, who lives in Sydney's south, said the entertainment system was down in his section for the entire return Qantas flight from Honolulu last weekend.

Rockwell Collins declined to comment, saying it was seeking legal advice.

Source: The Sun-Herald

Vultures are circling
 

For once its nice to see the MEL legal fraternity seeking pax input for a possible class action against the Rat for the IFE debacle.

They are not stupid , they can see BIG $$$$$$$$$ in this class action.

As I've said before they only need to use one reference document., ie the Trade Practices Act. Every flight that does not deliver the advertised product ( namely IFE ) -technically they are in breach !!:= :=

Some of those SENIOR MANAGER types( involved in this mess) better get some savvy legal advice asap otherwise the APA may punt them before this sorry saga begins.:D

They are going to need to have a substantial paper trail to dodge the wrath of the law.

How does the song go:

"From little things big things grow" ( Paul Kelly )

Swan to rescue Rat
 

Source: AAP
Labor seeks more scrutiny of Qantas bid

• February 04, 2007

FEDERAL Labor has called on the private equity consortium seeking to buy Qantas to submit details of its bid to foreign investment and competition watchdog scrutiny.

Labor's treasury spokesman Wayne Swan also called on Treasurer Peter Costello to encourage the consortium to seek such a referral.

Mr Swan acknowledged that Airline Partners Australia's (APA) bid for Qantas had been structured to fall within the requirements of the Qantas Sale Act, the Airports Act and the Foreign Acquisition Takeovers Act.
“(But) Federal Labor calls on the buyers to seek from the Treasurer a referral of the bid to the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC),” he said.
Mr Swan said Qantas was a critical economic asset as well as a national icon.
“This buyout bid must be judged on whether it is in the “national interest” and the “public interest” in accordance with foreign investment and competition principles,” he said.
“The definition of the national interest and the “public interest” is a legitimate debate for Australia to have and it's about time we had it to guarantee Australia's security when it comes to strategic national assets and essential services like those Qantas provides.”

Qantas Inquiry Most Unfortunate
 

THE consortium looking to buy Qantas says any parliamentary inquiry into the sale of the airline would "be most unfortunate".

The comment comes as politicians returned to Canberra today for the year's first sitting of parliament tomorrow, with the proposed sale of the airline becoming an increasing concern among government backbenchers.

Airline Partners Australia (APA) director Bob Mansfield says the consortium is happy to consider any conditions put on the sale by the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB).

But Mr Mansfield offered no guarantees.

"I think this independent process (from the FIRB) ... will turn it into a form of approval we can live with," Mr Mansfield told ABC radio.

"The reality is, it's not a normal company. Additional scrutiny was something we expected."

Australia's Macquarie Bank is the lead partner in APA. The consortium also includes Australian financial services company Allco Finance Group, which is involved in long-term aircraft leasing, and Allco Equity Partners, a listed large-scale private equity company.

US private equity giant Texas Pacific Group and Canadian equity investor ONEX Partners are also partners.

APA on Friday released its formal bidder's statement for Qantas.

Ninety per cent of Qantas shareholders must agree to the $5.60 per share offer, which opens today, for a takeover to proceed.

Mr Mansfield said the consortium's voluntary decision to subject its Qantas offer to the FIRB was designed to "try and put some calmness in this situation".

However, Liberal backbencher Bruce Baird says only guarantees from the consortium will satisfy him and a growing number of Government backbenchers.

"If they want ... Government support, then I think it cuts both ways," Mr Baird told ABC radio.

While he backed away from demanding a full Senate inquiry into the sale, Mr Baird did say the Government should require more than the "broad assurances" already offered by APA.

"We need guarantees," he said.

The increasing pressure on the sale process came as a poll commissioned by the ACTU showed almost 80 per cent of voters in Government-held marginal seats opposed the sale of the flying kangaroo.

The poll of 400 people in eight marginal seats held by the coalition, conducted by Melbourne social market research company Auspoll, found 79 per cent of those questioned were opposed to the sale.

Time for a Parliamentary Enquiry
 

No Qantas jobs promise given


By Belinda Tasker and Sandra O'Malley
February 05, 2007 05:03pm

THE consortium trying to take over Qantas today refused to rule out job cuts as the Federal Government tried to allay fears about the airline falling into foreign hands.

The Federal Government is under pressure from its own backbenchers, unions and Labor to impose strict conditions to help protect 38,000 Qantas workers whose jobs may be affected by the $11 billion deal.

But Treasurer Peter Costello and the Airline Partners Australia (APA) consortium say they are unable to give any guarantees when it comes to jobs.

APA director Bob Mansfield said while the consortium was willing to consider some conditions, including a commitment to regional services, jobs could not be guaranteed.

"On staffing, what we're putting on that, is we can't guarantee jobs, because I don't think any employer can," Mr Mansfield said to Southern Cross Radio.

"Our single focus on this whole exercise ... is to grow the organisation with 70 more planes and a 40 per cent bigger network at the end of the five to six years.

"If that happens, jobs will grow."

Mr Mansfield also flagged Qantas could sell "non-airline core businesses", but insisted it would maintain its current levels of maintenance work in Australia.

The ACTU, New South Wales Premier Morris Iemma and Coalition backbenchers demanded the Government set conditions on the deal to ensure no jobs are lost.

ACTU secretary Greg Combet said a new poll, sponsored by the union, showing almost 80 per cent of 400 voters in eight marginal coalition-held seats are opposed to the sale, highlighted the need for strict conditions.

"What is necessary ... are guarantees and strictly enforceable conditions, and these things are within the jurisdiction and power of the Commonwealth Government to impose on a sale such as this," he said to ABC Radio.

But Mr Costello rejected the calls and said job cuts were an issue for Qantas management.

"The fact that this application comes along doesn't change the fact that the board and the management are responsible for jobs," he said.

The latest concerns over Qantas's workforce came as the APA bowed to Government pressure and asked the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) to examine its takeover offer.

Mr Costello said the bid would be rigorously examined by the FIRB, which has 30 days to determine whether the deal goes against the national interest.

The treasurer also hosed down fears about whether the iconic airline could end up being foreign owned, and dismissed calls for a parliamentary inquiry.

The APA is a mix of foreign and locally-based companies, including Australia's Macquarie Bank and US private equity giant Texas Pacific Group.

Mr Costello said existing laws prevented foreign investors owning more than 49 per cent of Qantas.

"If anybody tries to lift the foreign ownership in Qantas above 49 per cent they will be stopped," he said.

"The Government will require that Qantas have majority Australian ownership, that it be under Australian control, that it be located in Australia and that the airline continue to serve important domestic and regional routes."

Mr Costello is expected to be grilled about the deal by backbenchers at a party-room meeting tomorrow.

NSW Liberal Bruce Baird, whose electorate of Cook is near Sydney airport, wants a guarantee that jobs won't be lost, that customers won't lose out if the takeover succeeds and backroom operations won't be based in Asia.

"I would like to see guarantees in terms that they won't be sending the maintenance offshore, that we won't be seeing regional services cut," he said.

Danny John
February 7, 2007
MACQUARIE Bank is set to mount a near-$40 billion assault on assets around the world with plans to raise more equity and debt to support its expansion overseas.
Fresh from its participation in the still-to-be-consummated $11 billion private equity bid for Qantas, the bank flagged a new round of financing in its drive to snap up infrastructure operations and parcel them in unlisted funds.
Analysts yesterday anticipated that Macquarie, whose interests range across airports, toll roads, water companies, real estate and car parks to name but a few, could well raise between $12 and $14 billion in equity alone in the coming year. This would allow it to attract a further two to three times the same amount of debt.
However, the bank is becoming a victim of its own success with market expectations of a profit upgrade failing to appear on the back of a trading update. That saw Macquarie's shares fall $2.48 to $81.40 yesterday as traders dumped the stock.
While chief executive Allan Moss said the bank was on track for a strong second-half performance for the year ending March, analysts had been expecting indications of a figure higher than $600 million. That would produce a full year figure of well over $1.2 billion.
But with no extra clues to the final outcome, yesterday's sell-off was the first setback for the stock after a 10 per cent rise alone in the share price over the last four weeks, fuelled by market talk of the number of corporate deals under way.
Goldman Sachs JBWere said that having run up from $60 since September to a recent high of $88, the shares could now drop back to as low as $75 in coming weeks due to a "touch of disappointing news".
Macquarie is looking to bolster its second-half profits by selling a number of businesses before its March year-end, which would help to ease the $1.5 billion pressure on its own balance sheet and clear the way for a new buying spree.
The bank has suffered delays over the last year in offloading some of the companies because it was not clear at the time whether it should spin them off into unlisted funds or float them.
"Now we're focusing on unlisted and that clearly reflects the investment preference pretty much globally," Mr Moss said.
He said yesterday that there was "huge interest" in the businesses concerned and that talks were under way with several parties. He would not list which assets were on the block because of the negotiations.
"It might not work to our commercial advantage to comment at this stage," he said.
The bank has expanded both its focus on international deals and its overseas operations.
It has taken on an extra 15 per cent in staff since last March, employing a total of 9400 people, of whom 3200 are based overseas. International numbers have jumped by more than a quarter in 10 months.
Macquarie also revealed that it had disposed of around $1.3 billion of businesses since last September but at the same time bought a further $900 million. The next round of sales is likely to raise under $1 billion.
I fear that as all good fairytales, this one must also come to an abrupt end. All this buying by MacBank shows an aggressive approach to business, which leaves little room for a more "human" approach to companies. Qantas will be no different. If you end up paying too much for something, the first thing you will try to do is to recoup some of that money. It should be clear that both Qantas management and MacBank know exactly how to do that, and that will be through its employees and its operations. I believe that what the travelling public need to hear, and this will put pressure on the government, is how their air safety could be compromised if more maintenance and flight attendant jobs go overseas, or if cheaper labour is brought in. These are the issues our unions need to focus on, together with highlighting the obscene amounts of money a few individuals will be making at the expense of thousands of others.