Merged: QANTAS/ALAEA EBA
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what has happend to the sc@#$ are they sitting at home on $2,000 a week, if we lung it out they will get their $40,000 bonus soon
I have waited 15 months now, I can easily wait another. Rumour had it that the company were desperate for an outcome....... well the ball is in their court and if this were true it just highlights how bloated and top heavy the joint has become the wheels grind ever slower and slower. We can all see where the savings must be made and the axe weilded.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not our problem, DC's business. If he wants to throw cash around like that, then good luck to him
It would be shrugged off as a whine if it weren't so tragically true.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what about the extra layer of management between MACS and DMMs - the "ops manager". It's an admission that the MACS have no idea about the operations they manage. Beautiful! One for each terminal, one for Base and one for each Heavy, and my guess is another for A380. Another $140K - $150K per manager down the tube, and another LAME/SLAME/DMM gone off the floor to do a job that the MACS and DMMs should be able to do between them. Back of the envelope cost: 11 ops managers on the east coast alone - $1.54M.
It beggars belief. We're already top-heavy in management in general in this company, and now we're adding more. Definitely a case of too many chiefs and not enough Indians.
It beggars belief. We're already top-heavy in management in general in this company, and now we're adding more. Definitely a case of too many chiefs and not enough Indians.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: s28e153
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if gd has had time to digest the proposed training bank system.
Another brilliant initiative by the executive, something for every lame and
a face saver at the 11th hour.
Another brilliant initiative by the executive, something for every lame and
a face saver at the 11th hour.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: australia
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well if you work in brisbane h/m, the next seems to be vote with your feet and head to the sandpit with Etihad 1 bloke already there 2 recently handed in the paperwork and 2 have recently got their start dates.
stick you heads up your ar$e or in the sand and BINGO your cost will come down as you have no LAMES to pay.
stick you heads up your ar$e or in the sand and BINGO your cost will come down as you have no LAMES to pay.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SYD
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst i appreciate the efforts of the exec, the training bank system means sweet FA to the base guys. Apart from a single a330 course we haven't seen any training for the last 3-4 years - thanks again to the brilliant thinking of MH. Congrats MH on completely disengaging your workers. Now where is that voting form again....
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the Fed Sec is under the impression that a "training bank" is the sweetner that will seal the deal he is delusional. Enough is enough. If this is what we have been waiting for, then it's not good enough. Just put it to the vote.
This entire process has played out better than we could traditionally have expected, but not better that it could have been. I think certain individuals will have to take stock and will need to pull their socks up when this is all over.
This entire process has played out better than we could traditionally have expected, but not better that it could have been. I think certain individuals will have to take stock and will need to pull their socks up when this is all over.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This entire process has played out better than we could traditionally have expected, but not better that it could have been. I think certain individuals will have to take stock and will need to pull their socks up when this is all over.
Its a shame half wits cannot work out what damage they do by making a broken system work.
Stop making it work and have it fixed!
Too many LAME's can't cope on their current wages yet by allowing the wages to be wittled away they can?
Each 1/2% reduced outcome is a 12 hr day OT required per year! That does not cover compounding issues over the years for future negs either.
Average wage inflation is 4.5%, we are looking at essentially 3%. Remember, training is skill enhancement and is separate to inflation.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: australia
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Each 1/2% reduced outcome is a 12 hr day OT required per year
52 x 38 = 1976 hours a year, I was going to add the 5 weeks leave and the 5 d.i.l.s
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Domo don't be shortsighted!
Realise this!
If we settle for 3% again whilst wage growth is 4 1/2 %-5% and rising and has been above 3% for a long time! Do the sums, its death by errosion and must be stopped.
$2000 last year is the 2% difference add that to a further $4160 due another loss of 2% = $6180 after only 2 years with 2% less. After 3 years its $6491
eg at the end of
2006 $100 000 $100 000
2007 $103 000 $105 000 $2000
2008 $106 090 $110 250 $4160
2009 $109 272 $115 763 $6491
# $12651 further out of pocket in only three years compared to the average wage inflation on a $100 000 income. This is additional to what has already been erroded!
When will people accept for our skill, and a 24/7 shift etc we are not paid that well.
More than half the LAME's are less than level 9 and cannot move past it.
The basic pay of a level 9 is $77 000. To be a level 9 generally you hold a number of licences to this figure add shift between 7% and 38%.
Single licence holders in the shed are well off the money at around $75 000 to $80 000 all up for their skills and shift!
Last edited by rudderless1 : 5th January 2008 at 13:29. Reason: incorrect years
rudderless1 is online now Report Post
If we settle for 3% again whilst wage growth is 4 1/2 %-5% and rising and has been above 3% for a long time! Do the sums, its death by errosion and must be stopped.
$2000 last year is the 2% difference add that to a further $4160 due another loss of 2% = $6180 after only 2 years with 2% less. After 3 years its $6491
eg at the end of
2006 $100 000 $100 000
2007 $103 000 $105 000 $2000
2008 $106 090 $110 250 $4160
2009 $109 272 $115 763 $6491
# $12651 further out of pocket in only three years compared to the average wage inflation on a $100 000 income. This is additional to what has already been erroded!
When will people accept for our skill, and a 24/7 shift etc we are not paid that well.
More than half the LAME's are less than level 9 and cannot move past it.
The basic pay of a level 9 is $77 000. To be a level 9 generally you hold a number of licences to this figure add shift between 7% and 38%.
Single licence holders in the shed are well off the money at around $75 000 to $80 000 all up for their skills and shift!
Last edited by rudderless1 : 5th January 2008 at 13:29. Reason: incorrect years
rudderless1 is online now Report Post
Loss of 2% over three years = $12651/$100 000
or say 4 days PER YEAR for 3 years
or say 1/2% = 1 day per year.
AM I WRONG?
Continue doing OT you may as well see your working week extended to achieve the SAME real wage, whats the difference?
Your starting point at next negotiation will also be smaller!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: s28e153
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Supposing the heavy maint ballot approves of their efficiencies
and shift patterns formalised in the eba, will we get to vote on it?
The suspense and melodrama is killing me.
and shift patterns formalised in the eba, will we get to vote on it?
The suspense and melodrama is killing me.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will get to vote on the "Heavy Maintenance shift pattern efficiences" when you vote for the EBA. If you're smart that will be a NO vote.
QE has stated that if included in the EBA the "Heavy Maintenance shift pattern efficiences" will be able to be forced on anyone in engineering, i.e. Heavy, Base, Line, A330, A380, B787.
As far as Qantas is concerned, these are Qantas Engineering shift pattern efficiences. Vote yes for an eba with them included at your peril.
QE has stated that if included in the EBA the "Heavy Maintenance shift pattern efficiences" will be able to be forced on anyone in engineering, i.e. Heavy, Base, Line, A330, A380, B787.
As far as Qantas is concerned, these are Qantas Engineering shift pattern efficiences. Vote yes for an eba with them included at your peril.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The suspense and melodrama is killing me.
As far as Qantas is concerned, these are Qantas Engineering shift pattern efficiences. Vote yes for an eba with them included at your peril.
If they overwhelmingly vote NO, it's a pretty good indicator that the subsequent EBA vote will go down, without some seriously juicy sweeteners.
If they overwhelmingly vote YES, there remain some powerful reasons for ALL LAMEs to vote NO on the EBA:
1. not everyone gets a level increase during the life of the EBA.
2. the flexible rostering will open a Pandora's Box
3. the quota system: only getting into the higher levels through a full type course; and the service points and the orphan training points being completely useless, when only the anointed few are getting any training despite clear evidence of manpower shortages in BNE Heavy, SYD Base & Line, AVV and MEL.
4. entry level LAMEs are still going to be paid less than high level AME's. What the...?
5. If you need more reasons to vote NO, just read QE's FAQ's on the intranet. There is plenty of bad news straight from the horse's mouth.
And the training bank: sounds good till you think about the implications. We're LAMEs. The only career progression many of us desire is to be trained on a new aircraft type. There is no training, so three weeks per year in the training bank that we can cash in every year is a poor substitute for a type course and a level increase, if you're lucky enough to be uncapped. And to suggest using the cash toward paying for external training, is this something we want to encourage? What will we pay for next? Basics? License renewals? Uniforms? If the eternally optimistic among us keep the three weeks per year in the back pocket for training, that's cash in the back pocket we go without till trained. If ever. If the heavens open and training rains down, those of us who cashed in because we needed the money (who doesnt these days), find ourselves bonded. I thought bonded labour ended when serfdom was abolished. I don't want to be a slave to this company! Apprentices aren't even bonded, merely indentured. What a retrograde step for QF LAMEs!
To the exec, nice idea in theory, but I'll STILL vote NO. I'm happy to go on an 8 hour shift, or an O/T ban or whatever it takes to get a FAIR DEAL!