Airservices Bonuses Linked to Premature ADSB Introduction?
Thread Starter
Airservices Bonuses Linked to Premature ADSB Introduction?
If my memory serves me correctly, at one of the Senate Hearings last year, a question was asked by one of the Senators to Airservices in relation to whether the performance bonuses paid to management were linked to the introduction of ADSB.
I understand the answer was going to be given on notice. Can anyone link me to the actual question and does anyone know if the question was ever answered?
I understand the answer was going to be given on notice. Can anyone link me to the actual question and does anyone know if the question was ever answered?
Dick
Only one I can find is this:
And yes - it is overdue along with all of Joe's other questions related to Airservices.
Only one I can find is this:
Question on notice no. 2581
Senator the Hon. Joe Ludwig: asked the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development on 12 October 2015:
With reference to bonuses at Airservices Australia:
(1) Can a copy of the policy on bonuses be provided.
(2) In regard to the policy on bonuses:
(a) what was the process by which the bonuses policy was put together;
(b) when did the policy come into effect;
(c) is the remuneration committee involved in setting this policy and are they required to approve these arrangements; if so, what is the committee's role;
(d) who else was involved in setting the policy;
(e) has the policy been altered since the federal election in September 2013; if so, can an outline of the changes be provided;
(f) did any outside consultation take place to provide advice on setting this policy; if so, can details be provided of the organisation that provided the advice, when it was provided and the cost associated with obtaining the advice.
etc etc
Senator the Hon. Joe Ludwig: asked the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development on 12 October 2015:
With reference to bonuses at Airservices Australia:
(1) Can a copy of the policy on bonuses be provided.
(2) In regard to the policy on bonuses:
(a) what was the process by which the bonuses policy was put together;
(b) when did the policy come into effect;
(c) is the remuneration committee involved in setting this policy and are they required to approve these arrangements; if so, what is the committee's role;
(d) who else was involved in setting the policy;
(e) has the policy been altered since the federal election in September 2013; if so, can an outline of the changes be provided;
(f) did any outside consultation take place to provide advice on setting this policy; if so, can details be provided of the organisation that provided the advice, when it was provided and the cost associated with obtaining the advice.
etc etc
Thread Starter
In just over 12 months time the most expensive ADSB requirements in the world are being introduced into Australia.
That is all aircraft. Even a 172 - that fly in cloud must have ADSB fitted. Prices are up to $45 k
We have never had a collision in cloud so no known safety issue is being addressed .
The FAA has installed over 600 ADSB ground stations to give adequate coverage over roughly the same land area as Australia. To maximise profits AsA have only installed a handful of stations to give coverage above FL 290.
On a recent flight in my Caravan we went out of ADSB coverage between Cooma And Sale at 8000'.
A number of pilots I have spoken to are removing their aircraft from the IFR category as they cannot afford ADSB fitting They will go scud running in future. Great for safety.
I would imagine while Sir Angus remains Chairman of AsA that no changes will be made.
That is all aircraft. Even a 172 - that fly in cloud must have ADSB fitted. Prices are up to $45 k
We have never had a collision in cloud so no known safety issue is being addressed .
The FAA has installed over 600 ADSB ground stations to give adequate coverage over roughly the same land area as Australia. To maximise profits AsA have only installed a handful of stations to give coverage above FL 290.
On a recent flight in my Caravan we went out of ADSB coverage between Cooma And Sale at 8000'.
A number of pilots I have spoken to are removing their aircraft from the IFR category as they cannot afford ADSB fitting They will go scud running in future. Great for safety.
I would imagine while Sir Angus remains Chairman of AsA that no changes will be made.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Toowoomba
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When this was being talked about around 10 years ago I got the distinct impression certain people MAY have been in line for some payola from a supplier of ADSB equipment.
This, of course, must have been a mistaken impression as this sort of thing can never happen.
This, of course, must have been a mistaken impression as this sort of thing can never happen.
You will find that most big businesses (and make no mistake AsA is a business), pay their executives with a percentage of their salary "at risk".
This means that unless they meet certain hurdles they don't get the "bonus".
The reality is that it isn't as much a bonus as an amount that should have been part of their fixed remuneration but the powers that be decided they would try and worm their way out of some or all of it.
I am not sure what Airservices is like but very few businesses I know actually pay the full amount, and if they did it isn't every year - it is the exception rather than the rule. For example, your contract might say that you are eligible for bonuses up to say 30% of your base salary. In reality they do the sums and decide that you get 50% of your bonus, or 25% or whatever. It is in fact a huge con in my opinion.
In the businesses I have known that pay executive bonuses there are a number of hurdles, some are easy some not so much. Things like successful execution of xyz project (with the definition of successful very vague), X percentage increase in the share price (I.e. An increase in shareholder value), passing a threshold in some sort of satisfaction score (be it punters or staff or similar), in the airline world it might be minimum number of crews doing maximum amount of flying, minimum number of controllers without major cockups - you get the idea.
The balance is usually very much biased towards the senior executive and much less so towards the middle/upper management, often times no one gets bonuses except the CEO and his/her henchmen.
In short for all but the very top of an organisation bonuses are pay that should have been included in their base pay but aren't and are used as a carrot
This means that unless they meet certain hurdles they don't get the "bonus".
The reality is that it isn't as much a bonus as an amount that should have been part of their fixed remuneration but the powers that be decided they would try and worm their way out of some or all of it.
I am not sure what Airservices is like but very few businesses I know actually pay the full amount, and if they did it isn't every year - it is the exception rather than the rule. For example, your contract might say that you are eligible for bonuses up to say 30% of your base salary. In reality they do the sums and decide that you get 50% of your bonus, or 25% or whatever. It is in fact a huge con in my opinion.
In the businesses I have known that pay executive bonuses there are a number of hurdles, some are easy some not so much. Things like successful execution of xyz project (with the definition of successful very vague), X percentage increase in the share price (I.e. An increase in shareholder value), passing a threshold in some sort of satisfaction score (be it punters or staff or similar), in the airline world it might be minimum number of crews doing maximum amount of flying, minimum number of controllers without major cockups - you get the idea.
The balance is usually very much biased towards the senior executive and much less so towards the middle/upper management, often times no one gets bonuses except the CEO and his/her henchmen.
In short for all but the very top of an organisation bonuses are pay that should have been included in their base pay but aren't and are used as a carrot
"The reality is that it isn't as much a bonus as an amount that should have been part of their fixed remuneration but the powers that be decided they would try and worm their way out of some or all of it."
Even your sentence acknowledges the definition of a "bonus" but then suggests the AsA bonuses are Clayton's Bonuses!! 
The various dictionary definitions of "BONUS" are:
- a sum of money added to a person's wages as a reward for good performance. e.g. "big Christmas bonuses"
- an extra dividend or issue paid to the shareholders of a company.
- something given or paid over and above what is due.
- a sum of money granted or given to an employee, a returned soldier, etc., in addition to regular pay, usually in appreciation for work done, length of service, accumulated favors, etc.
- something free, as an extra dividend, given by a corporation to a purchaser of its securities.
- a premium paid for a loan, contract, etc.
- something extra or additional given freely: "Every purchaser of a pound of coffee received a box of cookies as a bonus."
incentive, inducement;
I can assure you, a Bonus in AsA is an additional perk or snout in the trough for alleged exceptional performance and not payment of deferred salaries!!
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have a quick read through the last couple of Airservices Australia Annual Reports. Go to the remuneration section. The 2013/14 report clearly shows the executive salaries listed in 1 column (as 'reportable salary') with another separate column for bonuses. You don't have to be too clever to match the names & titles of the executive team, with the relevant $ figures they are pulling.
Interestingly, the 2014/15 report has changed its reporting style by the looks. Everyone's just lumped in together as either executive or non-executive groups with a total figure given. What used to be bonus is now called 'at risk component' with an explanation at the bottom of the page describing what that means (which is of course a bonus by another name!).
Gotta love the ever changing corporate-speak and buzz words to try to baffle the 'stakeholders'. Maybe they didn't want everyone to know how deep they had their respective snouts in the trough
Interestingly, the 2014/15 report has changed its reporting style by the looks. Everyone's just lumped in together as either executive or non-executive groups with a total figure given. What used to be bonus is now called 'at risk component' with an explanation at the bottom of the page describing what that means (which is of course a bonus by another name!).
Gotta love the ever changing corporate-speak and buzz words to try to baffle the 'stakeholders'. Maybe they didn't want everyone to know how deep they had their respective snouts in the trough
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before any bonus is/was/promised or delivered or paid, or considered, the free installation of ADSB into every aircraft on the Australian Registry should have been implemented as was promised. A performance bonus doesn't pass the pub test or any other test. Someone should make an election promise to seriously audit these QANGO's.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone explain to me why AsA, whose primary purpose is to provide ATC and ARFF services, which has a monopoly share of its market with no competition, has a structure where bonus payments even exist?
And why do they pay consultants to provide guidance and advice on major purchases and projects, when all needed expertise exists in house?
And why do they pay consultants to provide guidance and advice on major purchases and projects, when all needed expertise exists in house?
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just thinking out aloud again and in no particular order or direction to matters regarding this thread;
"Corruption is a form of dishonest or unethical conduct by a person entrusted with a position of authority, often to acquire any personal benefit. Corruption may include many activities including bribery and embezzlement, though it may also involve practices that are legal in this country. Notwithstanding however, government, or 'political', corruption occurs when an office-holder or other governmental employee acts in an official capacity for personal, or based on, or concerned with, empirical logic or employment gain".
This forum through a cursory search will reveal much of the ADSB debate.
The ADSB matter in Australia is a fraud.
"Corruption is a form of dishonest or unethical conduct by a person entrusted with a position of authority, often to acquire any personal benefit. Corruption may include many activities including bribery and embezzlement, though it may also involve practices that are legal in this country. Notwithstanding however, government, or 'political', corruption occurs when an office-holder or other governmental employee acts in an official capacity for personal, or based on, or concerned with, empirical logic or employment gain".
This forum through a cursory search will reveal much of the ADSB debate.
The ADSB matter in Australia is a fraud.
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must be getting cynical because most executive bonus schemes that I've seen in my career so far have never been much of a challenge to achieve and have been loosely worded to that effect.
It's really a sign of the overpaid executive times.
How's this $800,000 bonus for visiting strip clubs and snorting cocaine.
Sacked ANZ trader drops claim against the bank
It's really a sign of the overpaid executive times.
How's this $800,000 bonus for visiting strip clubs and snorting cocaine.
Sacked ANZ trader drops claim against the bank
And why do they pay consultants to provide guidance and advice on major purchases and projects, when all needed expertise exists in house?
Torres, I am not sure you read my post correctly (or I didn't write it properly - wouldn't be the first time).
I have no knowledge of AsA bonuses, I was making an observation of business in general. In many instances businesses sell the rem package as being "up to X dollars" and in this X they include the full 'bonus'.
In many instances the figure quoted is a reasonable one for the job, however the real make up of the salary is that a percentage (often 20-30% ish) is at risk and subject to various performance hurdles that are framed in such a way that you are unlikely to get the whole amount.
So, to go back to my earlier point, the bonus isn't really a bonus rather a way of making an average salary look better.
And yes I have worked under this system in a number of organisations.
Another trick is to quote the salary inclusive of super and as the super guarantee amount goes up it becomes your problem not the employers, as they have signed you to a contract which is inclusive of super, whatever the percentage.
I have no knowledge of AsA bonuses, I was making an observation of business in general. In many instances businesses sell the rem package as being "up to X dollars" and in this X they include the full 'bonus'.
In many instances the figure quoted is a reasonable one for the job, however the real make up of the salary is that a percentage (often 20-30% ish) is at risk and subject to various performance hurdles that are framed in such a way that you are unlikely to get the whole amount.
So, to go back to my earlier point, the bonus isn't really a bonus rather a way of making an average salary look better.
And yes I have worked under this system in a number of organisations.
Another trick is to quote the salary inclusive of super and as the super guarantee amount goes up it becomes your problem not the employers, as they have signed you to a contract which is inclusive of super, whatever the percentage.
Another trick is to quote the salary inclusive of super and as the super guarantee amount goes up it becomes your problem not the employers, as they have signed you to a contract which is inclusive of super, whatever the percentage.
Whether AsA bonuses are an "at risk" component of base salary or a performance based additional financial incentive is perhaps a moot point. Consider two points:
- AsA base salaries did not reduce when bonuses were introduced as a financial incentive.
- AsA base salaries are comparable to other Government authority and instrumentality salaries, which do not pay bonuses.
There is no doubt in my mind that AsA bonuses were introduced for achieving rather obtuse objectives, certainly not profit focused.
