Merged: QANTAS/ALAEA EBA
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear HotDog
And I'll add another one: Cosmic radiation plus operating on Christmas day New Year's Eve or day.
Quote:
We are individually responsible for thousands of lives daily and millions of dollars of company assets
You are not the only ones responsible for that. Would you agree that flight crew may have a place in that picture?
Quote:
We are individually responsible for thousands of lives daily and millions of dollars of company assets
You are not the only ones responsible for that. Would you agree that flight crew may have a place in that picture?
By the way, I worked Christmas Day and New Years Day last year. Upon reflection, on 9 of 16 years at Qantas I have worked Christmas Day.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bullied
Look at this fellows eyes. Do you feel the same?
How about this guy?
Have you had a moment like this out of frustration?
Are you sick of feeling angry all the time?
This can't be healthy?
Are you sick of being fed crap?If so, you must be a Qantas Engineer! Stand up you gutless bunch of b&stards and fight! Tell your executive to get off the gear and ask what they were thinking! You provide the essential service and have the bull by the balls! But you just cringe around the back end and get shat on! Grab those nut's and pull until respect is felt. Pull until he's weak at the knees, then look him in the eye and explain, it doesn't have to be this way! Prove that things are different. That your exec isn't just a reincarnated version of the dead regime. Even though you may be thinking 'same sh!t, same smell' have faith. In god! He's the only one listening!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let us not become yanks and forget history people, past EBA's where the deal on the table has not been that good and we have voted it down ,only to vote yes on a lessor crap deal months later.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Insider Trader sounds alot like the SYD Domestic manager....
He may be the youngest manager in Qantas,but he is also the fattest manager in Qantas,and if he isnt careful,he will die the fattest,youngest manager in Qantas.
Well done Insider,as I am sure you are only hardening the resolve of LAEs.It sounds like they vote is gonna be close.
By the way,what is the percentage required for it to get up/fall down?
He may be the youngest manager in Qantas,but he is also the fattest manager in Qantas,and if he isnt careful,he will die the fattest,youngest manager in Qantas.
Well done Insider,as I am sure you are only hardening the resolve of LAEs.It sounds like they vote is gonna be close.
By the way,what is the percentage required for it to get up/fall down?
, I'm behind you 100% of the way - but for now,
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear. Looks like some LAMEs are about to bend over and take 3%. 75%(?) of you voted to FIGHT for a better outcome and now you're walking away. Spineless, gutless jellyfish. If this gets up, never expect any other unions within Qantas to support you. Weak as pi$$.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: In the big chair
Age: 48
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, i must say for all your (collective) purported intelligance, you guys really don't seem to get it.
Firstly, for all your uneducated hypothesising, you have no idea as to who i am. The very fact that after 1 post, you pigeon-hole me into the sphere of QF management, says more about the people who post on this forum, and their siege mentality, than anything else. So be it. However, i read commentary (as disjointed as it is) from no more than 20 regular posters on this forum, all of whom inevitably beat the drums of war over EBA 8. At last count, there were over 1400 LAMEs employed by QF. The noisy musings of 1.5% of the licensed population hardly equates to an overwhelming mandate.
The theme of your replies were fairly common. Your lack of a decent wage rise in the past decade, your working of night shift, weekends & public holidays, working with chemicals, and your inherent ability to keep state of the machines in the air under immense duress. If indeed these are issues worth addressing, then why weren't they tabled for negotiation in this latest EBA's log of claims ? At the risk of rattling the hornets nest, no one other than yourselves is interested in the 'sacrifice' you divest in the pursuit of your career. The irony is that some of you notated the answers to your dilemmas by saying John Holland & Virgin would be viable alternatives. The fact is it is a free market, and if you are unhappy with your current employment conditions at QF, then feel free to move to another company on the 'superior' conditions. I'd suggest that none of you will, in part because some of you here are just 'trolls', and in part because the rest of you just want to whine like a 'roller' at idle, telling anyone who will listen how aggrieved you are.
Here is a piece of free advice. The QF LAMEs blinked, and the company won in the battle of EBA 8. You allowed a symbolic meeting with G Dixon, and a subsequent 'in principle' agreement to cloud your judgement, inflating your egos because you had an audience with the CEO. You fell for the oldest trick in the book, and allowed the intimidation of the CEO to fool you into thinking that you walked away the winners, when in fact you walked away with less than what you came for. It is clear that the company does not rate you with the same volume of importance that you guys rate yourselves. And whose fault is that ? May i suggest for EBA 9 that you employ some serious corporate negotiaters, who can see the woods from the trees, and will always play to your strengths.
Seriously, look at the facts. 14 months of negotiation, and this is the result. And you, as a group (however small it may be), have the audacity to snare at the company's 'contemptuous' attitude. I think a good, long, hard collective look in the mirror is called for. And FYI, i will guarantee the vote is carried in the positive by the ALAEA membership. It was an outcome never destined for failure.
Looking forward to the regurgitated, infantile barbs...
Firstly, for all your uneducated hypothesising, you have no idea as to who i am. The very fact that after 1 post, you pigeon-hole me into the sphere of QF management, says more about the people who post on this forum, and their siege mentality, than anything else. So be it. However, i read commentary (as disjointed as it is) from no more than 20 regular posters on this forum, all of whom inevitably beat the drums of war over EBA 8. At last count, there were over 1400 LAMEs employed by QF. The noisy musings of 1.5% of the licensed population hardly equates to an overwhelming mandate.
The theme of your replies were fairly common. Your lack of a decent wage rise in the past decade, your working of night shift, weekends & public holidays, working with chemicals, and your inherent ability to keep state of the machines in the air under immense duress. If indeed these are issues worth addressing, then why weren't they tabled for negotiation in this latest EBA's log of claims ? At the risk of rattling the hornets nest, no one other than yourselves is interested in the 'sacrifice' you divest in the pursuit of your career. The irony is that some of you notated the answers to your dilemmas by saying John Holland & Virgin would be viable alternatives. The fact is it is a free market, and if you are unhappy with your current employment conditions at QF, then feel free to move to another company on the 'superior' conditions. I'd suggest that none of you will, in part because some of you here are just 'trolls', and in part because the rest of you just want to whine like a 'roller' at idle, telling anyone who will listen how aggrieved you are.
Here is a piece of free advice. The QF LAMEs blinked, and the company won in the battle of EBA 8. You allowed a symbolic meeting with G Dixon, and a subsequent 'in principle' agreement to cloud your judgement, inflating your egos because you had an audience with the CEO. You fell for the oldest trick in the book, and allowed the intimidation of the CEO to fool you into thinking that you walked away the winners, when in fact you walked away with less than what you came for. It is clear that the company does not rate you with the same volume of importance that you guys rate yourselves. And whose fault is that ? May i suggest for EBA 9 that you employ some serious corporate negotiaters, who can see the woods from the trees, and will always play to your strengths.
Seriously, look at the facts. 14 months of negotiation, and this is the result. And you, as a group (however small it may be), have the audacity to snare at the company's 'contemptuous' attitude. I think a good, long, hard collective look in the mirror is called for. And FYI, i will guarantee the vote is carried in the positive by the ALAEA membership. It was an outcome never destined for failure.
Looking forward to the regurgitated, infantile barbs...
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the great Aussie spirit of Gallipoli, the Western Front, Singapore and Vietnam I'll go down fighting for a lost cause, while the clowns back at headquarters keep clean, well rested and ignorant of life on the front line while they fritter away lives - and I don't mean the ALAEA executive. I for one think the ALAEA executive have done as good a job as they could under the circumstances, and are only as strong as their membership. They could have gone harder if we - all of us united - had done more. No O/T for a start. When you get the call: 'Sorry, I'm sole carer today', 'Sorry, I'm fatigued', 'Sorry, just cracked my fourth beer'.
But unfortunately, like every crowd, there were those selfish short-sighted peple who couldnt look further than their short-term gain. And stuff the rest of the guys who would've really really liked or even needed to earn a little extra:
But have a conscience.
And morals.
And ethics.
And a grasp of the big picture.
And the ability to read between the legally responsible lines delivered by the executive.
Those who didnt let us all down.
Then there is our worst enemy: our own nature. You have to be a fixer to be an engineer. So instead of working to rule, we got the job done and the aircraft out, albeit late occasionally, and secretly took pride in the fact that we achieved so much with so little.
I think we should all take a bow to the executive for representing all of us, even the rotten apples.
That said, I'll vote NO. Sorry exec, I know you did your best.
It's time for the members to decide. Let the dice fall where they may.
But unfortunately, like every crowd, there were those selfish short-sighted peple who couldnt look further than their short-term gain. And stuff the rest of the guys who would've really really liked or even needed to earn a little extra:
But have a conscience.
And morals.
And ethics.
And a grasp of the big picture.
And the ability to read between the legally responsible lines delivered by the executive.
Those who didnt let us all down.
Then there is our worst enemy: our own nature. You have to be a fixer to be an engineer. So instead of working to rule, we got the job done and the aircraft out, albeit late occasionally, and secretly took pride in the fact that we achieved so much with so little.
I think we should all take a bow to the executive for representing all of us, even the rotten apples.
That said, I'll vote NO. Sorry exec, I know you did your best.
It's time for the members to decide. Let the dice fall where they may.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So NAS1801 what union do you represent that could possibly help us, or are you one of the bottom dwellers seeing what sort of deal the LAME's get so you can leech of our outcome.
Konehed, you must be one of the few that doesn't do O/T but whinged when higher duties bans was part of the PIA. If we bring back O/T bans now its way to late. The only way to go is to use all of our PIA options and also throw in 8 hour shifts!
I'm in if your willing.
Konehed, you must be one of the few that doesn't do O/T but whinged when higher duties bans was part of the PIA. If we bring back O/T bans now its way to late. The only way to go is to use all of our PIA options and also throw in 8 hour shifts!
I'm in if your willing.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orstralya
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think one fact that some of the P.I.A. hawks on this forum are forgetting is that, the ALAEA has withdrawn its intent of PIA. That means it can't just give Qantas three days notice and away we go. The whole process has to start again through the AIRC, at which point the commissioner may well now deny any application for PIA.
I think people are going to have to accept that, as far as EBA VIII goes, it's pretty much check-mate. Better to ratify this deal than to ratify a worse deal in three months time. Then we should re-group and lay plans for a better outcome for EBA IX.
Seriously, is there are more sensible alternative?
I think people are going to have to accept that, as far as EBA VIII goes, it's pretty much check-mate. Better to ratify this deal than to ratify a worse deal in three months time. Then we should re-group and lay plans for a better outcome for EBA IX.
Seriously, is there are more sensible alternative?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cougar
Cougar
Negative! I used to do overtime regularly, but stopped late last year when it was evident a little pressure needed to be applied on behalf of the executive. And I haven't done higher duties in many months. If asked, my response has been, 'give one of the younger guys a go at it.'
Konehed, you must be one of the few that doesn't do O/T but whinged when higher duties bans was part of the PIA.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Insider Trader
Insider Trader
After the comments in your first post, there are those who would like to put you in a hole other than one for pigeons. Not me. You can't fit a pelican in a pigeon hole. However:
Granted. But where there's smoke there's fire; you need a canary in the mineshaft; you need a flag to see which way the wind is blowing.
I believe they were, to the humiliation of MH. Time will tell if GD and friends actually takes on board the true state of affairs in Engineering.
I did not say that the competition's total pay were superior to my own. They are, finally, on a par. But it took a decade of service points and two type courses. A brand new LAME in the competition with one licence is my financial equal. Good luck to him. The point I made was not out of self-interest, but the future of engineering in this company. Pay peanuts, get monkeys.
Further, there is some vestige of loyalty to the company lingering within me, despite the best efforts of the currrent management regime. But I've been around long enough to know that managers come and go. And that's what I'm hanging around for. A change in attitude. What can I say, I'm an optimist.
We did, but a negotiator can only negotiate with someone who is willing to negotiate. The company put up the shutters and refused to budge while the negotiator was there. Now is that negotiating in good faith?
I think you mean 'sneer'. But I get the gist. If not contemptuous, what would you call the company's attitude? How would you react to a national manager of your profession who has made it clear he has a pathological dislike of the employees he manages, by word and deed? And the aloof, secretive management style is ultimately self-defeating. Have you seen how the new upper management of Air NZ turned around an airline in parlous state? By engaging, respecting and empathising with their workforce. They actually got out of the office and worked beside their employees. Now look at it. This lesson was learned in the US too - Continental if I'm not mistaken.
IT, I hope my arguments have risen above the infantile. I do so pine for your approval.
After the comments in your first post, there are those who would like to put you in a hole other than one for pigeons. Not me. You can't fit a pelican in a pigeon hole. However:
The noisy musings of 1.5% of the licensed population hardly equates to an overwhelming mandate.
If indeed these are issues worth addressing, then why weren't they tabled for negotiation in this latest EBA's log of claims ?
The fact is it is a free market, and if you are unhappy with your current employment conditions at QF, then feel free to move to another company on the 'superior' conditions.
Further, there is some vestige of loyalty to the company lingering within me, despite the best efforts of the currrent management regime. But I've been around long enough to know that managers come and go. And that's what I'm hanging around for. A change in attitude. What can I say, I'm an optimist.
May i suggest for EBA 9 that you employ some serious corporate negotiaters,
And you, as a group (however small it may be), have the audacity to snare at the company's 'contemptuous' attitude. I think a good, long, hard collective look in the mirror is called for.
IT, I hope my arguments have risen above the infantile. I do so pine for your approval.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Take a comparison of the EBAs negotiated with the other unions within Q and you will see that we have had the best outcome for the majority of members and the least impact on new LAMEs ie a dreaded B scale. They must be viewed in their totality.
Singularly this is our greatest dilemma. In the face of PIA most of us will still find a way to make planes fly. We know it and worst of all THEY know it.
Just before the PIA have a read of the posts and their tone - there was fear, uncertainity and doubt (thanks Sunfish) and posts questioning 'how long could this go on for'.
Obviously now that PIA is off, the chests are beating and a 'let me at em' mentality is prevailing. There is no doubt o/t bans would have hurt them, and some of us, but we would have another fight on our hands - that is fighting amongst ourselves.
There was a call for cool heads and that remains. Look at the package, do the sums, speak to your accountant and look at the net worth increase. Then go and ask a Q pilot, flt att or office worker what they got, what they gave up - in totality.
Above all, the Executive will support the members 100% if this package is voted down. But will the members support the Executive 100% during the course of PIA. I look around my workplace and I wouldn't trust that support from at least a dozen guys. That is the reality.
I'll say it again - it's an OK offer and there is something in it, 3.5 - 4.5%, over the four years for MOST guys. You can't please everybody, it just does not happen.
We stay on the job, do it well and be a whole lot less cooperative.
Oh yeh, Inside Trader
it's intelligEnce - you twit. You have a lot to learn. Take your head out of the books and look around, yes, there are are humans about.
Then there is our worst enemy: our own nature. You have to be a fixer to be an engineer. So instead of working to rule, we got the job done and the aircraft out, albeit late occasionally, and secretly took pride in the fact that we achieved so much with so little.
Just before the PIA have a read of the posts and their tone - there was fear, uncertainity and doubt (thanks Sunfish) and posts questioning 'how long could this go on for'.
Obviously now that PIA is off, the chests are beating and a 'let me at em' mentality is prevailing. There is no doubt o/t bans would have hurt them, and some of us, but we would have another fight on our hands - that is fighting amongst ourselves.
There was a call for cool heads and that remains. Look at the package, do the sums, speak to your accountant and look at the net worth increase. Then go and ask a Q pilot, flt att or office worker what they got, what they gave up - in totality.
Above all, the Executive will support the members 100% if this package is voted down. But will the members support the Executive 100% during the course of PIA. I look around my workplace and I wouldn't trust that support from at least a dozen guys. That is the reality.
I'll say it again - it's an OK offer and there is something in it, 3.5 - 4.5%, over the four years for MOST guys. You can't please everybody, it just does not happen.
We stay on the job, do it well and be a whole lot less cooperative.
Oh yeh, Inside Trader
intelligance
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
or are you one of the bottom dwellers seeing what sort of deal the LAME's get so you can leech of our outcome.
Each EBA, the company approaches the respective unions saying "Let's fight". (They do not come to us saying "here's 3%, just sign here". There is always a fight to remove nasty clauses / maintain conditions")
Qantas approached the ALAEA saying "Come on, let's fight" The ALAEA says "Alright! It's on". The other various unions say "we will support you in the fight". the ALAEA keeps running around beating their chest saying "Were'e gonna fight the company".
Finally, the ALAEA backs down. So much for the chest beating and talk of taking on the company!
Cougar, Tell me which unions in Qantas have the power to bring the company to it's knees?
You won't find many. One however stands out. I'll leave it up to you to work it out.
I can tell you now, from my discussions with friends working in other parts of the airline, their respective unions were more than willing to back up the ALAEA in the fight. Maybe you should take a read back and find some posts by cabin crew and pilots.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh and while I am here, the agreement presented is a classic case of divide and conquer.
It looks after just enough people to get the agreement over the line and offers very little to nothing for the rest. As it is, the majority of those that stand to gain most from this agreement are employed in ACS/Line. Those than gain very little are within heavy maintenance.
Divide and conquer, the #1 QF EBA objective.
It looks after just enough people to get the agreement over the line and offers very little to nothing for the rest. As it is, the majority of those that stand to gain most from this agreement are employed in ACS/Line. Those than gain very little are within heavy maintenance.
Divide and conquer, the #1 QF EBA objective.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said NAS1801
This EBA like all the others will be better for ACS/servicing areas while those in heavy will suffer. And those in ACS etc will not give a damn about the others, never have ,never will.
I hope that younger LAMEs and those in heavy maint. will see this EBA for what it is and vote against it. Make the glory boys fight with them for a better outcome for all.
It is a pity JHAS didn't get the A380 because it would have woken everyone up to the fact that they a weak and gutless.
Instead the glory boys will move forward while the rest who do the right thing will get screwed again.
At least with the A380 there will be very restricted licences issued , so in the not too distant future QF will get there way and the LAME to AME ratio will come back down to a more realistic number.
Either way this is the beginning of an all new era and it will have happened by stealth.
I hope that younger LAMEs and those in heavy maint. will see this EBA for what it is and vote against it. Make the glory boys fight with them for a better outcome for all.
It is a pity JHAS didn't get the A380 because it would have woken everyone up to the fact that they a weak and gutless.
Instead the glory boys will move forward while the rest who do the right thing will get screwed again.
At least with the A380 there will be very restricted licences issued , so in the not too distant future QF will get there way and the LAME to AME ratio will come back down to a more realistic number.
Either way this is the beginning of an all new era and it will have happened by stealth.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know there are line heros who would sign up for 5% and send all major maintenance overseas and still sleep at night
Syd HM closure is a recurring subject that highlights how callous this mgmt has become. I know the guys I work with have a real empathy when it comes to that shutdown. For those out there who do not feel that way, just look how different it is getting the jumbo's serviceable, the desperation that mgmt have with it's reliability and yet their smugness, that they achieved a dollar saving for shutting down an institution.
Yes, 380,330 and 73NG work has been kept onshore (inhouse?) but with this mgmt, it is a negotiating, cost issue not one of quality. Unfortunately the 'sheds' have always been a place where mgmt can see more immediate savings/flexibilities because of the nature of maintenance. This is not a reason why guys on line feel more insulated or aloof - it's just a different environment.
Because there are different outcomes for individuals it is not necessarily a divide and conquer strategy (think pre/post 96) rather, what do you - you and you get out of it.
What about those clauses that were modified/excluded? We've had a real win there. No CAT A certifiers - big win. These are only some of the non money issues that were successfully negotiated.
You've got to praise these guys for just having to put up with the bullsh*t they had to endure with the Q negotiating team. Until Dixon stepped in and said - do a deal - we would have been at the inflated whims of JM IO MH JV etc.