Ansett Staff Protest Qantas Fares....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ansett Staff Protest Qantas Fares....
Ansett staff protest Qantas fares
From AAP
23oct01
ANSETT workers are venting their anger at rival airline Qantas over its fare discounts with a protest at Melbourne Airport.
Australian Services Union delegate Steve Smith said Qantas' introduction of cheap fares was only motivated at eliminating the airline's opposition.
"We don't believe that these fares are sustainable," Mr Smith told radio 3AW.
"The amount of seats that are being put out there we don't believe are sustainable in relation to a business plan, and we feel that the flooding of the market of these fares is for no other reason than to get rid of us."
Later Mr Smith told news agency AAP that workers wanted the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to intervene to ensure Qantas did not extend its hold over the Australian air industry, which he said was unprecedented.
"These fares are predatory and whilst we are not asking for the elimination of cheap fares ... we would like fares to be sensible, because if this goes on and Ansett and Virgin (Blue) are eliminated, the biggest loser will be the Australian public," he said.
"When he took over Impulse, (Qantas chief executive officer Geoff) Dixon said discount fares were not sustainable, why is it sustainable now?"
Mr Dixon has said Qantas would welcome any investigation into its air fare pricing after it last week offered fares from $77, undercutting Ansett Mark II fare rates.
From AAP
23oct01
ANSETT workers are venting their anger at rival airline Qantas over its fare discounts with a protest at Melbourne Airport.
Australian Services Union delegate Steve Smith said Qantas' introduction of cheap fares was only motivated at eliminating the airline's opposition.
"We don't believe that these fares are sustainable," Mr Smith told radio 3AW.
"The amount of seats that are being put out there we don't believe are sustainable in relation to a business plan, and we feel that the flooding of the market of these fares is for no other reason than to get rid of us."
Later Mr Smith told news agency AAP that workers wanted the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to intervene to ensure Qantas did not extend its hold over the Australian air industry, which he said was unprecedented.
"These fares are predatory and whilst we are not asking for the elimination of cheap fares ... we would like fares to be sensible, because if this goes on and Ansett and Virgin (Blue) are eliminated, the biggest loser will be the Australian public," he said.
"When he took over Impulse, (Qantas chief executive officer Geoff) Dixon said discount fares were not sustainable, why is it sustainable now?"
Mr Dixon has said Qantas would welcome any investigation into its air fare pricing after it last week offered fares from $77, undercutting Ansett Mark II fare rates.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Metung RSL or Collingwood Social Club on weekends!
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australian Services Union delegate Steve Smith said Qantas' introduction of cheap fares was only motivated at eliminating the airline's opposition.
Cheap fares are OK to eliminate airlines' opposition provided the opposition is Compass MkI & II,Impulse,Virgin and Qantas.
"We don't believe that these fares are sustainable," Mr Smith told radio 3AW.
Ansett would like to get themselves into a financial position to offer the same fares as Qantas and Virgin.
"The amount of seats that are being put out there we don't believe are sustainable in relation to a business plan, and we feel that the flooding of the market of these fares is for no other reason than to get rid of us."
Until Ansett get 30 to 40 aircraft and all the AN staff are on the new Foxy/Sol wage reduction plan and we can flood the market with OUR new low cost fares - you are all being nasty, bully boys.
Mr Dixon has said Qantas would welcome any investigation into its air fare pricing after it last week offered fares from $77, undercutting Ansett Mark II fare rates.
Stop being cry babies and welcome to the world of airline competition as a new starter!
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whiskery,
you would never make a journalist. There are elements of the truth within your story.
Stuff ANSETT.
Let the rest of the world of aviation get on with the job.
Any political party that uses my hard earned dollars supporting ANSETT will never get my vote.
Cut them free.
you would never make a journalist. There are elements of the truth within your story.
Stuff ANSETT.
Let the rest of the world of aviation get on with the job.
Any political party that uses my hard earned dollars supporting ANSETT will never get my vote.
Cut them free.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Australia
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There wasn't much sense shown by the vocal lot at AN when they wanted their jobs back at the old pay rates and conditions and financial ruin doesn't seem to have knocked any sense into them yet. Sorry folks, ever since deregulation it has been a matter of survival of the fittest. If Ansett is going to be a "come back kid" then you better do a bit more "putting up". Nobody outside of Ansett owes you a chance at anything as far as the resurection of Ansett goes. Get the money, get the right management, get some aircraft you can afford to look after and get back into the game. The rest of us are are just doing the same.
[ 23 October 2001: Message edited by: sprucegoose ]
[ 23 October 2001: Message edited by: sprucegoose ]
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have got to be kidding Sprucegoose.Survival of the fittest.
Deregulation has been a disaster.
QF has had the government move the goalposts to ensure its survival;our aviation policy revolves around QF.List some policy decisions that have jeapordised QF.
If QF was in such great shape why did it fear so greatly an AN/SQ/AirNZ alliance.Why did the government,after surrepticious QF lobbying,thwart such an arrangement.
As for VB -comes in,cherrypicks and underpays staff,all with the aid of government subsidaries.
Impulse,well QF saved the day there didn`t they.
Deregulation has been a disaster.
QF has had the government move the goalposts to ensure its survival;our aviation policy revolves around QF.List some policy decisions that have jeapordised QF.
If QF was in such great shape why did it fear so greatly an AN/SQ/AirNZ alliance.Why did the government,after surrepticious QF lobbying,thwart such an arrangement.
As for VB -comes in,cherrypicks and underpays staff,all with the aid of government subsidaries.
Impulse,well QF saved the day there didn`t they.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One minute everyone is whinging the fares are too high and Qantas is taking advantage of the situation, now the fares are too low and Qantas is taking advantage of the situation!!
Give me a break!
Give me a break!
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Australia
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bulldog, the fittest operator's are not necessarily the ones with the most dough. Being fit in the business world includes but is not limited to cash. Its as much who you know as what you know. Certaintly in the past Ansett had been allowed to enter into anti competetive agreements with respect to terminal leases and the like, all designed to make it as hard as possible for a competitor to get a start in the industry. Deregulation has not been a disaster for anyone except the operators not able to put themselves in a competetive position in the market. What QF does to survive with or with out the help of the government is just the way the wheel turns. That wheel turned for AN in the past as well. I guess I don't like the way the privitisation of QF was handled any more than you but if I owned a company that I wanted to sell shares in I too would clean up the debt sheet to make the sale as attractive as possible. Murdoch could have done the same for AN if he chose to but he didn't.
This bullcrap about Virgin coming in and "cherry picking" and underpaying staff is a mis-nomer as well. To suggest that staff have been cherry picked in my mind is to suggest that people were drawn away from better paying jobs. How bout you go knock on your neighbours door and tell him how bad off a person is who makes $115,000 a year or even $65,000 for that matter. The base pay for flight attendants is still above the national average income. The so called industry standard that keeps getting kicked around on this forum in relation to VB and Impulse wages has been looked at from a rather upside down perspective. The industry standard is NOT what the best payed people make its what the lowest payed people make. If pilots are willing to get out of bed each day and fly a 737 or 717 for $110,000-115,000 a year than thats what the standard is. Anyone making more is above the so called standard. Thats why you have negotiated working conditions so that the the lowest level of salary and conditions is not allowed to deteriorate to a SUB standard, hardly the condition at VB. Ever Notice how few whingers there are on this forum from VB? There aren't many in the company that why. Can't say the same for QF and AN staff. I would say as far as company culture and moral goes VB is way above the "industry standard".
As for these government subsidies to VB, well thats the perogative of which ever government wants to attract VB into their market. The subsidies won't last forever and AN seems to want the same sort of consessions to get going again. You don't get what you deserve in this life, only what you negotiate. Good on Branson and anyone else that gets help getting started. As for wizzing in the wind about how an already established operator runs their business as another makes such a start well tough titties, you want a piece of the action you have to hit the groung running and Ansett will have to do the same. If QF wants to sell a million discounted seats thats their business. Lets face it, VB is their competion and they will have to sell cheaper seats to keep their market share even without AN back in the skies. If the AN administrators cannot get together a business plan that will survive in a market sure to have discounted fares for the long term then they don't have a business to sell. Nobody's fault, it's just life in the real world. The old Ansett couldn't survive in that world and if the new Ansett is going to any better then the plan of attack must be centered around competing with the discounted market, not the fat end of the yield spectrum.
This bullcrap about Virgin coming in and "cherry picking" and underpaying staff is a mis-nomer as well. To suggest that staff have been cherry picked in my mind is to suggest that people were drawn away from better paying jobs. How bout you go knock on your neighbours door and tell him how bad off a person is who makes $115,000 a year or even $65,000 for that matter. The base pay for flight attendants is still above the national average income. The so called industry standard that keeps getting kicked around on this forum in relation to VB and Impulse wages has been looked at from a rather upside down perspective. The industry standard is NOT what the best payed people make its what the lowest payed people make. If pilots are willing to get out of bed each day and fly a 737 or 717 for $110,000-115,000 a year than thats what the standard is. Anyone making more is above the so called standard. Thats why you have negotiated working conditions so that the the lowest level of salary and conditions is not allowed to deteriorate to a SUB standard, hardly the condition at VB. Ever Notice how few whingers there are on this forum from VB? There aren't many in the company that why. Can't say the same for QF and AN staff. I would say as far as company culture and moral goes VB is way above the "industry standard".
As for these government subsidies to VB, well thats the perogative of which ever government wants to attract VB into their market. The subsidies won't last forever and AN seems to want the same sort of consessions to get going again. You don't get what you deserve in this life, only what you negotiate. Good on Branson and anyone else that gets help getting started. As for wizzing in the wind about how an already established operator runs their business as another makes such a start well tough titties, you want a piece of the action you have to hit the groung running and Ansett will have to do the same. If QF wants to sell a million discounted seats thats their business. Lets face it, VB is their competion and they will have to sell cheaper seats to keep their market share even without AN back in the skies. If the AN administrators cannot get together a business plan that will survive in a market sure to have discounted fares for the long term then they don't have a business to sell. Nobody's fault, it's just life in the real world. The old Ansett couldn't survive in that world and if the new Ansett is going to any better then the plan of attack must be centered around competing with the discounted market, not the fat end of the yield spectrum.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Big island north of Antarctica!
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sprucegoose......should another low cost airline start up with 737s and pay their Captains say $70,000, would that now become the new industry standard?
I'm sure there are a lot of people who would like to get out of bed in the morning to earn that sort of money, but I doubt you could call it an industry standard.
[ 24 October 2001: Message edited by: eagle767 ]
I'm sure there are a lot of people who would like to get out of bed in the morning to earn that sort of money, but I doubt you could call it an industry standard.
[ 24 October 2001: Message edited by: eagle767 ]
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sprucegoose,
after re-reading your three paragraphs of hogswash I think you have just confirmed my post.
VB does cherry pick.Broome/Gove ect ignored,much to detriment of regional Australia.Another failure of deregulation.
VB pilots are underpaid by industry standard(divide previous incumbants` 737 wages equally for an average).
The wheel turning that you mentioned had Branson very close to selling you out.Your self-righteous post, under a simplistic & naive guise as to understanding and justifying the motions of business and governments,is a facade behind which you hide.
after re-reading your three paragraphs of hogswash I think you have just confirmed my post.
VB does cherry pick.Broome/Gove ect ignored,much to detriment of regional Australia.Another failure of deregulation.
VB pilots are underpaid by industry standard(divide previous incumbants` 737 wages equally for an average).
The wheel turning that you mentioned had Branson very close to selling you out.Your self-righteous post, under a simplistic & naive guise as to understanding and justifying the motions of business and governments,is a facade behind which you hide.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Australia
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
eagle767, in essence thats exactly right. If a significant player in any industry comes along and starts a competetive business and pays less than the other guy AND has no trouble filling positions then the industry standard is established. It will never happen but Dixon is trying to get his staff to work for what is a new industry standard set by the lower cost competition. There is a lot more to that standard than just the money, there is the relative productivity in return for that wage that has to be accounted for. In the world of flying big jets the highest salaries have been fought for by the unions. But if each pilot who was an ALPA or IALPA or whatever member were left to fight for themselves then you would find most would happily work for a lot less than they do. The "average" ,if you want , of that lower threshold is indeed the standard for that group of people. Fortunately none of us in Oz are actually working to that standard.
bulldog, I fail to see what destinations such as Broome/Gove ect have to do with cherry picking anything to anyones detriment. AN was subsidised,were they not, to operate to many remote locations and still the fares were astronomical. Has nothing to do with VB. VB has never been to those places so if there is any disadvantage to be seen here it's unrelated to VB's presence in the market. Do you propose that any new carrier should be obliged to operate unprofitably on routes where there just isn't money to be made? Thats a very poor business proposition. Even AN bailed out of many remote markets and allowed the routes to be served by a lower cost operation. In time if there is a good business case for going to Gove/Broome/Karratha ect... then I am sure VB will be there. There is only 10 aeroplanes in the fleet, how many places can they go?
As for Branson nearly selling VB out, all you know for sure is that an offer was made to buy VB. Hardly a near sell out. In any case that is life, if he had sold us so what? It's a pretty good bet a portion of the company will be sold eventually.
I wouldn't have considered my post self righteous either. The point is that QF and VB are the two major airlines in Oz at the moment. AN, in spite of former glories, is a new entrant of sorts. The game has changed and neither VB or QF owe AN the time of day. If AN wants back in they are going to have to be price competetive. That price threshold is now lower than it was a year and a bit ago. QF knows that and are positioning themselves to adjust accordingly.
bulldog, I fail to see what destinations such as Broome/Gove ect have to do with cherry picking anything to anyones detriment. AN was subsidised,were they not, to operate to many remote locations and still the fares were astronomical. Has nothing to do with VB. VB has never been to those places so if there is any disadvantage to be seen here it's unrelated to VB's presence in the market. Do you propose that any new carrier should be obliged to operate unprofitably on routes where there just isn't money to be made? Thats a very poor business proposition. Even AN bailed out of many remote markets and allowed the routes to be served by a lower cost operation. In time if there is a good business case for going to Gove/Broome/Karratha ect... then I am sure VB will be there. There is only 10 aeroplanes in the fleet, how many places can they go?
As for Branson nearly selling VB out, all you know for sure is that an offer was made to buy VB. Hardly a near sell out. In any case that is life, if he had sold us so what? It's a pretty good bet a portion of the company will be sold eventually.
I wouldn't have considered my post self righteous either. The point is that QF and VB are the two major airlines in Oz at the moment. AN, in spite of former glories, is a new entrant of sorts. The game has changed and neither VB or QF owe AN the time of day. If AN wants back in they are going to have to be price competetive. That price threshold is now lower than it was a year and a bit ago. QF knows that and are positioning themselves to adjust accordingly.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Darwin
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As per my response to EWL's thread on D&G.
http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimatebb.cgi ?ubb=get_topic&f=12&t=007454
[ 24 October 2001: Message edited by: Miss Behaviour ]
http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimatebb.cgi ?ubb=get_topic&f=12&t=007454
People in the NT have no choice of carriers as AN Mk2 didn't feel Darwin was important enough to fly to.
Qantas haven't dropped fares since the AN demise however have increased capacity by replacing some 737 services with 767's plus additional services to PER/BNE/MEL where there was high demand.
I'd even go as far as saying it's easier now to get discount economy seats on QF ex DRW to major capitals than it was prior to 14 Sep.
Imagine if QF did put the fares up. The same people crying foul about QF offering cheap seats would still be complaining. Is it not a good thing that in light of nil competition that QF are still offering a wide selection of fares for everybody?
If they have the aircraft available why shouldn't they? By not doing so how would it help the AN Mk2 situation when they seemingly had no intention of flying here (DRW) anyway?
Qantas haven't dropped fares since the AN demise however have increased capacity by replacing some 737 services with 767's plus additional services to PER/BNE/MEL where there was high demand.
I'd even go as far as saying it's easier now to get discount economy seats on QF ex DRW to major capitals than it was prior to 14 Sep.
Imagine if QF did put the fares up. The same people crying foul about QF offering cheap seats would still be complaining. Is it not a good thing that in light of nil competition that QF are still offering a wide selection of fares for everybody?
If they have the aircraft available why shouldn't they? By not doing so how would it help the AN Mk2 situation when they seemingly had no intention of flying here (DRW) anyway?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sick to death of this stipid "you get too much because its more than I get" argument with wages. If pilots are going to accept lesser pay and conditions to fly with some carriers than others, thats fine. But dont sit there and say that the other guys and gals are overpayed and that yours is the Industry standard.
Why not accept that you are underpayed and commit yourself to obtaining a better deal.
As far as VB goes, havent many pilots accepted these positions as a chance to come home from positions overseas?? arent most nights at home?? I can understand trading these positives conditions for a reduced wage.
But....
To claim this as an industry standard is wrong!
I am sure a new startup could go to any GA Airport and empoly as many hundreds of people who would fly a 737 for $35,000 per annum, with no DTA or benefits. Bring your own lunch and a thermos of coffee. Sure beats circuits in a C152 for $20 per hour. (been there!!). BUT THAT DOESNT MAKE IT RIGHT! And Surely wouldnt make it an INDUSTRY STANDARD!!!
Instead of whining about high wages elsewhere, we should all fight for a better deal for ourselves.
Why not accept that you are underpayed and commit yourself to obtaining a better deal.
As far as VB goes, havent many pilots accepted these positions as a chance to come home from positions overseas?? arent most nights at home?? I can understand trading these positives conditions for a reduced wage.
But....
To claim this as an industry standard is wrong!
I am sure a new startup could go to any GA Airport and empoly as many hundreds of people who would fly a 737 for $35,000 per annum, with no DTA or benefits. Bring your own lunch and a thermos of coffee. Sure beats circuits in a C152 for $20 per hour. (been there!!). BUT THAT DOESNT MAKE IT RIGHT! And Surely wouldnt make it an INDUSTRY STANDARD!!!
Instead of whining about high wages elsewhere, we should all fight for a better deal for ourselves.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SW3MALE I dont think the VB pilots are complaining on this forum about low wages or QF pilots being overpaid. I think you have got it all back to front. Those complaining are the others that feel the Virgin pilots are underpaid. The feeling I get from reading the posts is that maybe the only reason they are complaining is because they dont want a reduction in there own fat pay packets,not because they feel for the poor VB captain in 120k. Sprucegoose is correct, I think the majority of tech crew in VB are happy unlike somewhere else.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no doubt VB crew are happy at present.
If you took a poll on how many QF/NJS/Impulse/Flight west pilots as a percentage were also happy you would probably end up with a similar result.
VB is small in pilot numbers and is a new airline, if the pilots aren't happy now they never will be. Lets ask the same question when they have been around a while.
I have no idea what the total pilot population in Aus is however I am sure that only a very small portion of them are represented here.
If you took a poll on how many QF/NJS/Impulse/Flight west pilots as a percentage were also happy you would probably end up with a similar result.
VB is small in pilot numbers and is a new airline, if the pilots aren't happy now they never will be. Lets ask the same question when they have been around a while.
I have no idea what the total pilot population in Aus is however I am sure that only a very small portion of them are represented here.
short flights long nights
I will take heat for this, but I just think its time for Ansett staff to realise, its all over. The CURENTLY flying airlines in Australia (I mean those not in adminestration) can can fly an aircraft for $1.00 a seat or 6 zillion a seat, well thats up to them. That is simply thier choice. Ansett made a choice re outgoings/yield/incomings, and it did not work 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Mr. Dixon once said, "Virgin Blue have been whinging since the moment they arrived and they will be whinging till the moment they go"
The Australian Govenment allowed and helped FUND a foreigner to come here and create competition. Sure they have helped create many jobs for Australians but any profit (which I assume is minimal because their fares are not viable in the long term, as we saw with impulse) is directly taken out of the country- tell me how this is good for the aus economy? And to add insult to injury they name it Virgin BLUE to suck up to the australian public. Yep, TRUE BLUE pommy revenue Richie
16000 AUSTRALIANS lost their jobs and their livelihood (including me) and VB hold a very strong percentage of the blame. And yes, it was branson's intention to drive someone out of business-it's what he does best-he was fully aware that four airlines could not survive in this market.
So VB wants to create competition? Well they will certainly get it with QF's new low cost operation. And let's see them cry 'unfair' with their schoolyard mentality about the predatory fares QF will be offering. VB's own competition boasting reflected back at them will no doubt be a bitter pill to swallow.
It will be survival of the fittest and QF has the means and the determination to DOMINATE.
It's no secret that a large percentage of VB pilots were involved in the 89 crisis who were desperate to come home even if it meant being paid peanuts by INDUSTRY STANDARDS. If they are happy to work for the 'crazy clark's' airline-good for them.
Forgive me if I sound harsh, but there is so much hardship out there with ex ansett staff
The Australian Govenment allowed and helped FUND a foreigner to come here and create competition. Sure they have helped create many jobs for Australians but any profit (which I assume is minimal because their fares are not viable in the long term, as we saw with impulse) is directly taken out of the country- tell me how this is good for the aus economy? And to add insult to injury they name it Virgin BLUE to suck up to the australian public. Yep, TRUE BLUE pommy revenue Richie
16000 AUSTRALIANS lost their jobs and their livelihood (including me) and VB hold a very strong percentage of the blame. And yes, it was branson's intention to drive someone out of business-it's what he does best-he was fully aware that four airlines could not survive in this market.
So VB wants to create competition? Well they will certainly get it with QF's new low cost operation. And let's see them cry 'unfair' with their schoolyard mentality about the predatory fares
QF will be offering. VB's own competition boasting reflected back at them will no doubt be a bitter pill to swallow.It will be survival of the fittest and QF has the means and the determination to DOMINATE.
It's no secret that a large percentage of VB pilots were involved in the 89 crisis who were desperate to come home even if it meant being paid peanuts by INDUSTRY STANDARDS. If they are happy to work for the 'crazy clark's' airline-good for them.
Forgive me if I sound harsh, but there is so much hardship out there with ex ansett staff
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sour grapes or what!You say that VB complain about QF, and in the same breath you whinge about VB driving AN to the wall because of there direct competition?? Well that Pommie provided jobs to many thankfull Australian pilots and crews,so "thanks RICHIE" 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry I’ve missed out on this interesting stuff. I’ve just woken up after a long night’s work out in the real world.
I just read from some person revelling in the name: “Firewall_999” that:
“The Australian Government allowed and helped FUND a foreigner to come here and create competition. Sure they have helped create many jobs for Australians but any profit (which I assume is minimal because their fares are not viable in the long term, as we saw with Impulse) is directly taken out of the country- tell me how this is good for the Australian economy? And to add insult to injury they name it Virgin BLUE to suck up to the Australian public”
Interesting stuff.
Lots of precedent of course. Nothing is ever new in aviation.
The Bolte government in Victoria propped up Ansett against a hostile takeover from a “foreign” state (WA) by Holmes’a Court.
The Hawke government helped (by fire-sale pricing) BA in to buy a large chunk (and effective control) of Qantas.
The Fraser government helped a large foreign company (NEWS) buy Ansett.
The Hawke government fell over itself to allow foreign carriers in here to destroy Australian jobs in 1989-90
The Hawke government gave control over 50% of Australia’s current and future terminals to a foreign controlled carrier (News/TNT owned Ansett) in 1987) and point-blank refused to build a single gate (not even a brick was laid) for any new carrier. VB and Impulse finally broke that log jam.
The Hawke government gave a giant helping hand to direct competitors of Ansett and Qantas by forcing hundreds of Australian pilots to go to work for Cathay, Thai, Malaysian, Asiana, Singapore etc, etc.
The Keating government took on the role of prime salesman for Ansett, tore up the Open Skies Aust/NZ agreement and forced a foreign carrier (ANZ) to buy Ansett.
So it has happened before and will happen again. No doubt.
Since the name of this thread is “Ansett staff protest Qantas fares” can I take it that these same staff were the Ansett staff who protested at their own airlines vicious and predatory attacks on Compass 1? Actually I think we all know the answer to that trick question.
Let’s run over Life’s Lesson One just one more time. “It is sufficient for evil to prevail that good men stand idle”
Ansett staff mean well no doubt but their protests should have been loud and strong years ago. It’s too late by far now. Your management and unions let you down long ago and you said nothing. You watched foreign carriers (Monarch, Air 200 Air Botswana etc) come in 1989 and said nothing. You saw your flight decks filled with strange accents and said nothing. You saw hundreds of your former pilots leave town one by one, only welcomed back if they’d sign staggeringly generous individual contracts (ACTU blessing!) and said nothing. You saw Ansett operate one of almost every jet ever built and said nothing. You saw the Kendall CRJ introduction fiasco and said nothing. You saw Ansett start up a manifestly doomed international operation with the wrong aircraft in a real hurry and said nothing (except a loud collective “Ouch” when the 747 nosewheel hit the runway in KSA). You saw Kim Beazley unleash the military during the 1989 problems and never thought that one day a government might use those tactics against you. Were you at the waterfront helping the Maritime boys against Reith? You saw your own airline attack Compass 1 and didn’t ever think it might be you out there one day as the Compass staff were, waving flags to get support. It was always the other guys who were getting it in the neck so you, your management and your “caring” Kelty and Crean-led union bosses stood silent.
Well sorry folks…that’s all there is in ”Hard Lessons in Aviation 101”. The class is over. It’s time to graduate as many, many of us have done. Think about new careers. Look for jobs with VB. Join small airlines (its fun out there). Get together and try to help someone start a new airline. Put some collective money into a struggling operator to help him upgrade to turbine equipment. Its all been done and it all hurts but its all something. It will probably break your heart (ask the pilots who put $1 m in to start Southern Cross/Compass 11) but they too all moved on to better things..
This probably sounds like preaching but in fact it’s only the real world that the “friendly” cloak of government support kept from you all these years. It is far too late for the “Old” Ansett but it’s not too late for a fresh start for your particular place in the industry if you do something. If you just blindly assume that Lindsay Fox et al or SIA are all your dreams come true (even though they may well be…but don’t let down your guard!) and sit back again then you’ll be out there in the cold again one day. Doing nothing is not a pro-active strategy.
Good luck
Sherm
I just read from some person revelling in the name: “Firewall_999” that:
“The Australian Government allowed and helped FUND a foreigner to come here and create competition. Sure they have helped create many jobs for Australians but any profit (which I assume is minimal because their fares are not viable in the long term, as we saw with Impulse) is directly taken out of the country- tell me how this is good for the Australian economy? And to add insult to injury they name it Virgin BLUE to suck up to the Australian public”
Interesting stuff.
Lots of precedent of course. Nothing is ever new in aviation.
The Bolte government in Victoria propped up Ansett against a hostile takeover from a “foreign” state (WA) by Holmes’a Court.
The Hawke government helped (by fire-sale pricing) BA in to buy a large chunk (and effective control) of Qantas.
The Fraser government helped a large foreign company (NEWS) buy Ansett.
The Hawke government fell over itself to allow foreign carriers in here to destroy Australian jobs in 1989-90
The Hawke government gave control over 50% of Australia’s current and future terminals to a foreign controlled carrier (News/TNT owned Ansett) in 1987) and point-blank refused to build a single gate (not even a brick was laid) for any new carrier. VB and Impulse finally broke that log jam.
The Hawke government gave a giant helping hand to direct competitors of Ansett and Qantas by forcing hundreds of Australian pilots to go to work for Cathay, Thai, Malaysian, Asiana, Singapore etc, etc.
The Keating government took on the role of prime salesman for Ansett, tore up the Open Skies Aust/NZ agreement and forced a foreign carrier (ANZ) to buy Ansett.
So it has happened before and will happen again. No doubt.
Since the name of this thread is “Ansett staff protest Qantas fares” can I take it that these same staff were the Ansett staff who protested at their own airlines vicious and predatory attacks on Compass 1? Actually I think we all know the answer to that trick question.
Let’s run over Life’s Lesson One just one more time. “It is sufficient for evil to prevail that good men stand idle”
Ansett staff mean well no doubt but their protests should have been loud and strong years ago. It’s too late by far now. Your management and unions let you down long ago and you said nothing. You watched foreign carriers (Monarch, Air 200 Air Botswana etc) come in 1989 and said nothing. You saw your flight decks filled with strange accents and said nothing. You saw hundreds of your former pilots leave town one by one, only welcomed back if they’d sign staggeringly generous individual contracts (ACTU blessing!) and said nothing. You saw Ansett operate one of almost every jet ever built and said nothing. You saw the Kendall CRJ introduction fiasco and said nothing. You saw Ansett start up a manifestly doomed international operation with the wrong aircraft in a real hurry and said nothing (except a loud collective “Ouch” when the 747 nosewheel hit the runway in KSA). You saw Kim Beazley unleash the military during the 1989 problems and never thought that one day a government might use those tactics against you. Were you at the waterfront helping the Maritime boys against Reith? You saw your own airline attack Compass 1 and didn’t ever think it might be you out there one day as the Compass staff were, waving flags to get support. It was always the other guys who were getting it in the neck so you, your management and your “caring” Kelty and Crean-led union bosses stood silent.
Well sorry folks…that’s all there is in ”Hard Lessons in Aviation 101”. The class is over. It’s time to graduate as many, many of us have done. Think about new careers. Look for jobs with VB. Join small airlines (its fun out there). Get together and try to help someone start a new airline. Put some collective money into a struggling operator to help him upgrade to turbine equipment. Its all been done and it all hurts but its all something. It will probably break your heart (ask the pilots who put $1 m in to start Southern Cross/Compass 11) but they too all moved on to better things..
This probably sounds like preaching but in fact it’s only the real world that the “friendly” cloak of government support kept from you all these years. It is far too late for the “Old” Ansett but it’s not too late for a fresh start for your particular place in the industry if you do something. If you just blindly assume that Lindsay Fox et al or SIA are all your dreams come true (even though they may well be…but don’t let down your guard!) and sit back again then you’ll be out there in the cold again one day. Doing nothing is not a pro-active strategy.
Good luck
Sherm
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas anger at subsidies
By GEOFF EASDOWN and KAREN COLLIER
26oct01
QANTAS reacted angrily last night to a Federal Government election campaign decision to subsidise two rivals.
Ansett Mark II has accepted a deal that could cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars a week in government funded subsidies.
A similar deal has been offered to Virgin Blue to expand operations to Hobart, Launceston and Adelaide.
Qantas' sales and marketing executive general manager, John Borghetti, said using public funds to bolster Ansett was "bizarre".
"Never in your wildest dreams would you imagine a deregulated industry could have a government-subsidised airline," Mr Borghetti told the Herald Sun.
The subsidies, initiated to revive flights on low trafficked routes, strike back at last week's decision by Qantas to flood the market with cheap fares.
Under the arrangement, Ansett Mark II will get government funding if flights to Hobart and Adelaide fall below accepted levels.
Virgin Blue's commercial head, David Huttner, later said: "We never asked for a handout, all we have ever asked for is a level playing field.
"They told us they had done a deal with Ansett and they would do the same for us."
In the deal agreed to with Ansett administrators Mark Mentha and Mark Korda, taxpayers could be billed as much as $400,000 a week if costs blow out from any slump in ticket sales.
Transport Minister John Anderson last night confirmed the Government confronted a potential underwriting cost of $150,000 a week from the Melbourne-Adelaide sector.
Airline sources also suggested the taxpayers' share for the Melbourne-Hobart leg could be $272,000 a week, if enough seats were not sold.
The Federal Government will meet 80 per cent of flight operating costs if passenger loads for the carrier's A320 Airbuses fall below 60 per cent of capacity on both of the routes.
"We've agreed to underwrite them for a period of time until they can get going and I'm quite confident they will," Mr Anderson said.
He said the Government wanted both Ansett Mark II and Virgin Blue to succeed.
Under the new arrangements the airlines announced yesterday:
ANSETT Mark II will charge $88 one-way fares for the two flights a day it will operate between Hobart and Adelaide from November 2.
ANSETT Mark II will also begin flights from Perth and Adelaide, charging $396 return.
A DIRECT $297 return Ansett flight would begin between Brisbane and Melbourne on November 6 -- Melbourne Cup Day.
QANTAS has struck a frequent flyer deal with former Ansett partner Diners Club in which its members will now earn travel points with the carrier.
VIRGIN Blue will go national, launching a daily flight to Perth from Melbourne and Adelaide from December 10 for a kick-start special $175 one-way fare for the first five days. Standard fares will start from $199. Further regional services will be announced next week, the airline said.
Beginning today, Golden Wing lounges at Ansett's Melbourne, Sydney, Perth and Brisbane terminals will be re-opened to entice business travellers.
But the upmarket food and drink service once offered to Golden Wing members will not be offered.
Instead, patrons will retrieve their needs from vending machines.
By GEOFF EASDOWN and KAREN COLLIER
26oct01
QANTAS reacted angrily last night to a Federal Government election campaign decision to subsidise two rivals.
Ansett Mark II has accepted a deal that could cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars a week in government funded subsidies.
A similar deal has been offered to Virgin Blue to expand operations to Hobart, Launceston and Adelaide.
Qantas' sales and marketing executive general manager, John Borghetti, said using public funds to bolster Ansett was "bizarre".
"Never in your wildest dreams would you imagine a deregulated industry could have a government-subsidised airline," Mr Borghetti told the Herald Sun.
The subsidies, initiated to revive flights on low trafficked routes, strike back at last week's decision by Qantas to flood the market with cheap fares.
Under the arrangement, Ansett Mark II will get government funding if flights to Hobart and Adelaide fall below accepted levels.
Virgin Blue's commercial head, David Huttner, later said: "We never asked for a handout, all we have ever asked for is a level playing field.
"They told us they had done a deal with Ansett and they would do the same for us."
In the deal agreed to with Ansett administrators Mark Mentha and Mark Korda, taxpayers could be billed as much as $400,000 a week if costs blow out from any slump in ticket sales.
Transport Minister John Anderson last night confirmed the Government confronted a potential underwriting cost of $150,000 a week from the Melbourne-Adelaide sector.
Airline sources also suggested the taxpayers' share for the Melbourne-Hobart leg could be $272,000 a week, if enough seats were not sold.
The Federal Government will meet 80 per cent of flight operating costs if passenger loads for the carrier's A320 Airbuses fall below 60 per cent of capacity on both of the routes.
"We've agreed to underwrite them for a period of time until they can get going and I'm quite confident they will," Mr Anderson said.
He said the Government wanted both Ansett Mark II and Virgin Blue to succeed.
Under the new arrangements the airlines announced yesterday:
ANSETT Mark II will charge $88 one-way fares for the two flights a day it will operate between Hobart and Adelaide from November 2.
ANSETT Mark II will also begin flights from Perth and Adelaide, charging $396 return.
A DIRECT $297 return Ansett flight would begin between Brisbane and Melbourne on November 6 -- Melbourne Cup Day.
QANTAS has struck a frequent flyer deal with former Ansett partner Diners Club in which its members will now earn travel points with the carrier.
VIRGIN Blue will go national, launching a daily flight to Perth from Melbourne and Adelaide from December 10 for a kick-start special $175 one-way fare for the first five days. Standard fares will start from $199. Further regional services will be announced next week, the airline said.
Beginning today, Golden Wing lounges at Ansett's Melbourne, Sydney, Perth and Brisbane terminals will be re-opened to entice business travellers.
But the upmarket food and drink service once offered to Golden Wing members will not be offered.
Instead, patrons will retrieve their needs from vending machines.