QANTAS MANAGEMENT: ADDING VALUE?
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max,
The information I received could be wrong but it was that a certain head of people has purchased a Porsche.Personally I would have thought a Volvo would be more appropriate for KB.
The information I received could be wrong but it was that a certain head of people has purchased a Porsche.Personally I would have thought a Volvo would be more appropriate for KB.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: australia
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mangement adds value
cut costs better value
vh-ojq on the ground for a week due lack of manpower
this cost money but you could not measure before the event
maintenance is like insurance we hate the bills but pay it to prevent accidents
speed
quality
low cost
pick any two
cut costs better value
vh-ojq on the ground for a week due lack of manpower
this cost money but you could not measure before the event
maintenance is like insurance we hate the bills but pay it to prevent accidents
speed
quality
low cost
pick any two
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally,I would like to see the true figures on the London Base and the BKK base which has been supporting the LHR base and the revenue figures for the LAX/JFK/LAX sectors.
I'm sure others in different areas would also like answers too
I'm sure others in different areas would also like answers too
Guest
Posts: n/a
1000 management related jobs to be slashed!
Todays news at around 15:35... 1000 management/support staff jobs to go.
News came through on ZZ corporate via email. 20% reduction in management positions over 2006/2007 financial year.
Will post a copy tomorow.
so lets look at some figures. 20% of 5000 is 1000. So currently, Qantas has 5000 managers/support staff?? (the email did not elaborate on the term "support staff", however from the general theme of the email, these seem to be staff that support managemnt rolls. Facilitators? Secrataries?
Qantas employes around 38,000 people. 5000 is 13% of this figure. So 13% of Qantas staff are currently in management related rolls??
Look at it this way.... 1 management related staff member for every 6.6 members of remaining staff!
I wonder what the average salaries of these 1000 management related staff are? Could this be the biggest cost saving exercise undertaken yet? (Most definately, the biggest efficiency gain anyway)!
News came through on ZZ corporate via email. 20% reduction in management positions over 2006/2007 financial year.
Will post a copy tomorow.
so lets look at some figures. 20% of 5000 is 1000. So currently, Qantas has 5000 managers/support staff?? (the email did not elaborate on the term "support staff", however from the general theme of the email, these seem to be staff that support managemnt rolls. Facilitators? Secrataries?
Qantas employes around 38,000 people. 5000 is 13% of this figure. So 13% of Qantas staff are currently in management related rolls??
Look at it this way.... 1 management related staff member for every 6.6 members of remaining staff!
I wonder what the average salaries of these 1000 management related staff are? Could this be the biggest cost saving exercise undertaken yet? (Most definately, the biggest efficiency gain anyway)!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: House
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If only the media and aviation experts would get off their collective arses and start asking some serious questions of the Board and Executive Management. C'mon Australian Aviation, Steve Creedy, Ian Thomas etc. the serious questions about the ability of Qantas' Executive management and Board remain not only unanswered but unasked.
What about the following?
1. Is it true that Jetstar will now be flying to Honolulu out of Sydney and can choose the days that they want to operate and QF must fit in around them? If a high yield day is the weekend, Jetstar can operate those days if they wish and QF must not. Is this not a form of protectionism?
2. Is it true that QF wanted to increase capacity to Christchurch but Jetstar complained that QF would be taking passengers off them? Did Alan Joyce have a bit of a hissy fit at the thought of having to compete with QF and losing load share to the QF product?
3. The $64,000 question.
(a) What is the agenda at QF?
(b) If all new hires have been approved by Executive Management over the past few years, how did they get it so wrong and hire 1,000 too many?
(c) Who is ultimately responsible?
(d) Who is also responsible for the Jetstar Asia debacle?
(e) Why should the employees suffer for the stuff ups of the CEO and his "advisors"?
4. Is it time for Geoff Dixon to step aside as the CEO of Qantas? Is he so disliked by his own workforce that he is no longer a positive force to have around? Does he feel the same animosity towards his own employees?
5. Do you perpetuate the "Group Think" and appoint an internal candidate or do you start to really change the environment and head hunt one of the many suitably qualified CEO's from around the world. Is it time for a cultural change starting at the top?
6. What steps have the Board and Senior Executives taken personally to lead by example in these tough times? Has there been a paring back of conditions of employment in a true show of leadership by example, or do they just pat themselves on the back for the good job they are doing in destroying other people’s lives?
7. Can't let this one go.
(a) What value does Ian Oldmeadow and Oldmeadow Consulting bring to Qantas,
(b) How much have they been paid for their services since they commenced with the Organization, and
(c) To what degree are the actions of this contractor responsible for the low level of "employee engagement" as displayed by the Hewitt Survey?
There you go serious journalists. Some serious questions for you to ask of those in charge of the good ship QF. From route protection to employee shafting you can cover the whole field. Look forward to reading the answers although we probably already see the smoke coming up the screen.
What about the following?
1. Is it true that Jetstar will now be flying to Honolulu out of Sydney and can choose the days that they want to operate and QF must fit in around them? If a high yield day is the weekend, Jetstar can operate those days if they wish and QF must not. Is this not a form of protectionism?
2. Is it true that QF wanted to increase capacity to Christchurch but Jetstar complained that QF would be taking passengers off them? Did Alan Joyce have a bit of a hissy fit at the thought of having to compete with QF and losing load share to the QF product?
3. The $64,000 question.
(a) What is the agenda at QF?
(b) If all new hires have been approved by Executive Management over the past few years, how did they get it so wrong and hire 1,000 too many?
(c) Who is ultimately responsible?
(d) Who is also responsible for the Jetstar Asia debacle?
(e) Why should the employees suffer for the stuff ups of the CEO and his "advisors"?
4. Is it time for Geoff Dixon to step aside as the CEO of Qantas? Is he so disliked by his own workforce that he is no longer a positive force to have around? Does he feel the same animosity towards his own employees?
5. Do you perpetuate the "Group Think" and appoint an internal candidate or do you start to really change the environment and head hunt one of the many suitably qualified CEO's from around the world. Is it time for a cultural change starting at the top?
6. What steps have the Board and Senior Executives taken personally to lead by example in these tough times? Has there been a paring back of conditions of employment in a true show of leadership by example, or do they just pat themselves on the back for the good job they are doing in destroying other people’s lives?
7. Can't let this one go.
(a) What value does Ian Oldmeadow and Oldmeadow Consulting bring to Qantas,
(b) How much have they been paid for their services since they commenced with the Organization, and
(c) To what degree are the actions of this contractor responsible for the low level of "employee engagement" as displayed by the Hewitt Survey?
There you go serious journalists. Some serious questions for you to ask of those in charge of the good ship QF. From route protection to employee shafting you can cover the whole field. Look forward to reading the answers although we probably already see the smoke coming up the screen.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Paradise
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks everyone for the good thoughtful stuff. There must be a lot more so let's keep it coming as soonere or later some of the unpalatable facts will emerge in the public domain that will lead to serious questions being asked, and well before the next AGM.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Endor
Age: 83
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the strategy was obvious.
1. Use Jetstar to stop Virgin Blue gaining market share. You need the facade of Jetstar as an independent operator for Qantas to do this without getting nailed by the ACCC for predatory pricing. The reality is that Jetstar is subsidised under the table by dodgy cost allocation methods. However the ACCC has no forensic avaition accounting skills so it will never be able to prove it.
2. Use Jetstar to reduce Qantas labor costs by carefully segregating Jetstar employees and Qantas employees. The Jetstar employees are paid less because it is a new company without the buildup of terms and conditions the mainline has, so they can offer the bare minimum. Thus the labor costs of Qantas as a group are reduced as a proportion of sales.
Carefully build up Jetstar at the main lines expense. At some point in time, emasculate and kill whats left of the mainline and rebadge Jetstar as Qantas. Its the management version of a cuckoo strategy. Qantas is feeding soimething that will one day displace it.
Great strategy, I haven't yet worked out what the Achilles heel is.
1. Use Jetstar to stop Virgin Blue gaining market share. You need the facade of Jetstar as an independent operator for Qantas to do this without getting nailed by the ACCC for predatory pricing. The reality is that Jetstar is subsidised under the table by dodgy cost allocation methods. However the ACCC has no forensic avaition accounting skills so it will never be able to prove it.
2. Use Jetstar to reduce Qantas labor costs by carefully segregating Jetstar employees and Qantas employees. The Jetstar employees are paid less because it is a new company without the buildup of terms and conditions the mainline has, so they can offer the bare minimum. Thus the labor costs of Qantas as a group are reduced as a proportion of sales.
Carefully build up Jetstar at the main lines expense. At some point in time, emasculate and kill whats left of the mainline and rebadge Jetstar as Qantas. Its the management version of a cuckoo strategy. Qantas is feeding soimething that will one day displace it.
Great strategy, I haven't yet worked out what the Achilles heel is.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: AU
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mel Bourne,
it was a BAe146 that operated with an average load factor of two!!
People of the Forum,
Reality is QF the mainline company is FoneKayed. They have no way of covering their cost of capital. A profit of $450M is grossly inadequate and a failure. The company has to record a profit of at least $1.3Billion to break even. An honorable Chairperson and CEO would fall on thier swords! (after knifing the EXCO on the way to their rooms)
JQ International is also stuffed as a consequence of the fuel situation. They have more "ex spurts" than a dripping tap in Bourke street trying to rework the business case. They have even brought back the one person AJ said he would never allow in the company again - SG the network numbers man.
The fact is however, that JQ has a cost base that can save the bacon for GD, and big Pete of 7 series & X5 (with GPS), and poor decision making fame -such as JQ Asia.
The Board meeting in Melbourne (not to be confused with Mel of the Bourne family) decided JQ International is to proceed at any cost. ANY COST. The product will be revamped and with be more like the QF product (business class with free food and drink and leg room) but with the low wages rate and conditions that the JPC generously gave. QF mainline will hand over more routes to JQI.
JQ Asia is needed to link to JQ International, 'cause they can use their cabin crew ( check their pay rates girls and real girls of the forum). By the way Mel, I have heard QF has had to prop up JQA to the tune of $70m so far. It is a bleeding basket case. Nothing could save the governor-general; nothing can save JQA!
The announcement that 1000 executive / managers would go is great news. BUT, BUT, BUT....how many will be back within 3 months of their departure as consultants on $2000 a day!!!!!!!!!!! Can I have redundancy Geoff? If GD was serious he would would have announced a staff reduction of 15%.
We are in dire straits people. Flax jackets will not be enough.
it was a BAe146 that operated with an average load factor of two!!
People of the Forum,
Reality is QF the mainline company is FoneKayed. They have no way of covering their cost of capital. A profit of $450M is grossly inadequate and a failure. The company has to record a profit of at least $1.3Billion to break even. An honorable Chairperson and CEO would fall on thier swords! (after knifing the EXCO on the way to their rooms)
JQ International is also stuffed as a consequence of the fuel situation. They have more "ex spurts" than a dripping tap in Bourke street trying to rework the business case. They have even brought back the one person AJ said he would never allow in the company again - SG the network numbers man.
The fact is however, that JQ has a cost base that can save the bacon for GD, and big Pete of 7 series & X5 (with GPS), and poor decision making fame -such as JQ Asia.
The Board meeting in Melbourne (not to be confused with Mel of the Bourne family) decided JQ International is to proceed at any cost. ANY COST. The product will be revamped and with be more like the QF product (business class with free food and drink and leg room) but with the low wages rate and conditions that the JPC generously gave. QF mainline will hand over more routes to JQI.
JQ Asia is needed to link to JQ International, 'cause they can use their cabin crew ( check their pay rates girls and real girls of the forum). By the way Mel, I have heard QF has had to prop up JQA to the tune of $70m so far. It is a bleeding basket case. Nothing could save the governor-general; nothing can save JQA!
The announcement that 1000 executive / managers would go is great news. BUT, BUT, BUT....how many will be back within 3 months of their departure as consultants on $2000 a day!!!!!!!!!!! Can I have redundancy Geoff? If GD was serious he would would have announced a staff reduction of 15%.
We are in dire straits people. Flax jackets will not be enough.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Paradise
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bringing back to the top.
With yesterday's profit warning, lower earnings forecast and slow but certain share price slide, surely there is a lot more we can add to the list? Come on guys and let it all hang out! Maybe the media will pick up on some of the inside knowledge posted here and start asking questions as the AGM is a way off yet and small shareholders are, in any event, paid scant attention no matter how serious are their concerns.
With yesterday's profit warning, lower earnings forecast and slow but certain share price slide, surely there is a lot more we can add to the list? Come on guys and let it all hang out! Maybe the media will pick up on some of the inside knowledge posted here and start asking questions as the AGM is a way off yet and small shareholders are, in any event, paid scant attention no matter how serious are their concerns.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Where I'm not alarmed
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Use of Consultants
Apart from the recognised consultants such as BCG, how many former Qantas employees are now engaged as 'consultants'. A story I heard concerns a senior executive who was given a 'package' to leave the airline. He did this but soon found himself working as a consultant for a certain start up airline in Singapore on something like $1000 a day plus all expenses. When that gig finished he resurfaced at Mascot as a consultant a couple of days a week. He is still there. How smart on Qantas's part is this? If he was so valuable, why was he paid out in the first place? I wonder how many other like consultants are around? 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Start with Mr Oldmeadow and his wife both on considerably more than $2000 per day
and they are giving great advice.
BCG have taken over $150m out of QF in the past 10 years
and then there is McKinseys, Bozz Allen, the New York based consultants being used by engineering.
These are the big ones. There are a lot of individual contractors advising HR, corporate training, Customer service, etc
Perhaps we could start by sacking anyone who needs to hire a consultant to tell them how to do what they have been employed to do!!
and they are giving great advice.
BCG have taken over $150m out of QF in the past 10 years
and then there is McKinseys, Bozz Allen, the New York based consultants being used by engineering.
These are the big ones. There are a lot of individual contractors advising HR, corporate training, Customer service, etc
Perhaps we could start by sacking anyone who needs to hire a consultant to tell them how to do what they have been employed to do!!
