Qantas staff 'interrogated' over joke

[oz_mark]

From Yahoo! Qantas staff 'interrogated' over joke - Yahoo!7 News

A rude joke amongst Qantas cabin crew led to airline management intimidating flight attendants and interrogating them four days after the joke was made, a union says.

A Flight Attendants' Association of Australia memo says a group of Qantas cabin crew managers met an inbound flight from Honolulu on Friday, October 27 - four days after the joke had been made by a flight attendant during a staff briefing.

The union says cabin crew were then split up and interrogated.

[..more..]

[Yada Yada]

Geoff Dixon, Margaret Jackson and a union official walk into a bar...

Seriously though, what happened to management's sense of humour? The more they treat QF workers like sh!t, the more their customers suffer through dispirited, unhappy crews. A friend of mine who is a QF pilot said that he and many he worked with have had a gutful of management's belligerent attitude.

[Dave Noble]

I don't think that there is enough information to form an real opinion one way or other since there is no details about what the allegation is

Dave

[Yada Yada]

I don't think that there is enough information to form an real opinion one way or other since there is no details about what the allegation is

There is enough information for me to form the opinion that management's reaction was extraordinarily heavy-handed. This was not about investigating a major safety breach or criminal activity. It was all about a joke told four days earlier! Management's action to line up on the aerobridge while pax are still deplaning so they could board the plane and isolate individual crew members to ask questions is a very heavy-handed response.

[bambbbam2]

There is enough information for me to form the opinion that management's reaction was extraordinarily heavy-handed. This was not about investigating a major safety breach or criminal activity. It was all about a joke told four days earlier! Management's action to line up on the aerobridge while pax are still deplaning so they could board the plane and isolate individual crew members to ask questions is a very heavy-handed response.

Why heavy-handed? Surely if you have nothing to hide, what is the issue with "Management" asking you questions?

How do you know that it wasn't about "investigating a major safety breach or criminal activity", and how would "management" know that it wasn't unless they investigated. Someone has obviously logged an issue, and it's only fair that it is investigated.

I think this really demonstrates the problems that Qantas and unions have. It's the real us and them mentality - there is no "management" in business.. it's only a group of people that should be pulling in the same direction.

[SeatBackForward]

Well if they had the Virgin policy "We Take Jokes Seriously" then I'd be concerned...

[NM]

And all we have is one side of the story as reported to the media by the union - hardly an unbiased perspective of the situation.

And if the QF management did not investigate the allegation, then the same media would be asking why they did not follow up on the complaint. There must have been some sort of complaint lodged by someone and surely there is then a responsibility to follow it up. Doing so quickly and without warning does not allow those involved to collude to establish a common "recollection" of the event.

I see this as a very sensitive situation that the QF management has to follow up. I am unable to draw a conclusion regarding whether the process followed as appropriate or not since we only have one side reporting their view of the process.

[one9]

And all we have is one side of the story as reported to the media by the union - hardly an unbiased perspective of the situation.

And if the QF management did not investigate the allegation, then the same media would be asking why they did not follow up on the complaint. There must have been some sort of complaint lodged by someone and surely there is then a responsibility to follow it up. Doing so quickly and without warning does not allow those involved to collude to establish a common "recollection" of the event.

I see this as a very sensitive situation that the QF management has to follow up. I am unable to draw a conclusion regarding whether the process followed as appropriate or not since we only have one side reporting their view of the process.

I agree with

[Dave Noble]

There is enough information for me to form the opinion that management's reaction was extraordinarily heavy-handed. This was not about investigating a major safety breach or criminal activity. It was all about a joke told four days earlier! Management's action to line up on the aerobridge while pax are still deplaning so they could board the plane and isolate individual crew members to ask questions is a very heavy-handed response.

I still maintain that there is not enough information to form a valid opinion. Someone seems to have lodged a complaint of some description and it was investigated. Without knowing the full details , how can it be determined if it was heavy handed or not? It could have been a serious issue that was reported and the staff are claiming what was heard /reported was a joke for example.

Dave

[one9]

And all we have is one side of the story as reported to the media by the union - hardly an unbiased perspective of the situation.

And if the QF management did not investigate the allegation, then the same media would be asking why they did not follow up on the complaint. There must have been some sort of complaint lodged by someone and surely there is then a responsibility to follow it up. Doing so quickly and without warning does not allow those involved to collude to establish a common "recollection" of the event.

I see this as a very sensitive situation that the QF management has to follow up. I am unable to draw a conclusion regarding whether the process followed as appropriate or not since we only have one side reporting their view of the process.

I agree with you.