QF Engineers set to strike !

[Standby]

100% agree.

Coming from someone who's pro-union (in general).

Agree as well. In a previous I life acted as a Union Delegate. Again this issue shows poor advise from Union HQ not communicating the changing reality of their negotiating position to the members.
Sure Qantas will announce a massive profit in a month or 2 but the undenyable fact is the balance has changed..fuel costs increases will be 1 to 1/2 times this years profit.No other union EBA got more than 3%. What looks like a buyers market in terms of skills shortages allowing them to be a bit Bolshie at the moment looks like turning quickly with the layoffs and aircraft groundings /Mergers going on at an increasingly rapid rate..that means there will be qualified LAMEs available pretty soon in large numbers. The $A and working for an airline not being thru Chapter 11 some well timed job adds will fill these roles pretty quickly...message is 3% of something is way better than 5% of nothing...Unions not reading and communicating big picture stuff has led to many job losses.I fear a reality check is needed

 

[simongr]

My understanding is that negotiations have been continuing for over 1.5 years now on a new award.

I suppose, at some point, you either need to accept management's offer or you need to escalate the process if you want to persist with your demands (you = the engineers, not you personally )

My guess is that there isn't some provision for arbitration in this award any more.

The old IRC (that could order arbitration between parties) was abolished by the Howard government as part of the Work Choices reforms

I certainly agree that mediation is a far better way of getting a good result (being a former law student myself).

But in some cases, unfortunately, one (or both) parties appears to think that they are better off sticking to their guns, rather than making concessions. If engineers have been asking for a 5% pay rise for 18 months, and they are determined to get it (which, I'm not sure is a great idea in the current climate), and they aren't currently bound by an award, then they are free to withdraw their labour (via a strike), just as the employer is free to lock them out.

It's not a good outcome for anyone, especially customers. But it's a far cry from being illegal.

Noting a lack of comment on the current exec pay freezes...

In my environment anything above 3% required increased responsibility or other change - not the status quo...

 

[oz_mark]

Qantas cancels flights due to strike | PerthNow

SIX Qantas flights from Sydney and Melbourne have been cancelled tomorrow as engineers prepare to walk off the job in three states.

The airline has been forced to cancel another 18 flights on Tuesday, as engineers step up industrial action that threatens to continue for weeks.

The cancelled Tuesday flights affect Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane airports.

QF405 the 6.30 am SYD-MEL is the only one I can spot cancelled tomorrow atm

 

[Mal]

Qantas cancels flights due to strike | PerthNow

ALAEA national secretary Steve Purvinas says strikes will continue until Qantas comes back with a better offer.

He said the strikes were not designed to hit services hard and next week's four-hour stoppages would involve half of the engineers on duty at the time.

Hopefully the strikebreakers will be unleashed by Qantas and give the LAME's hell. Being a militant union and causing delays for weeks on end is not acceptable. Get a real job you slackers.

 

[rhjames]

Unbelievable - at a time when airlines are going broke, they should be happy to have a job, and doing all they can to keep them. Airlines are one of the hardest hit industries due to fuel costs. They shouldn't entertain any considerations for pay increases above CPI. Of course, I apply this concept at all levels.

 

[oz_mark]

Unbelievable - at a time when airlines are going broke, they should be happy to have a job, and doing all they can to keep them. Airlines are one of the hardest hit industries due to fuel costs. They shouldn't entertain any considerations for pay increases above CPI. Of course, I apply this concept at all levels.

The last CPI figures I saw put the infation rate at 4.2%. I believe Qantas is offering less than this (3%), and of cource the unions want more. Applying your CPI figure would require both parties to give ground.

 

[codash1099]

The last CPI figures I saw put the infation rate at 4.2%. I believe Qantas is offering less than this (3%), and of cource the unions want more. Applying your CPI figure would require both parties to give ground.

Qantas are also offering 1% extra in superannuation which would mean about 1.3% (I'm guessing) in real terms. The union is effectively striking over about 0.7%.

 

[rhjames]

The last CPI figures I saw put the infation rate at 4.2%. I believe Qantas is offering less than this (3%), and of cource the unions want more. Applying your CPI figure would require both parties to give ground.

The last quarter was 4.2% However, when all this started months ago it was 3%.

 

[Danger]

QF405 the 6.30 am SYD-MEL is the only one I can spot cancelled tomorrow atm

My 2pm SYD-MEL has also been cancelled. (Although interestingly it was still available to book on the QF website.)

 

[Platy]

The union is effectively striking over about 0.7%.

By the same logic, the QF exec are effectively allowing a situation to escalate by refusing to negotiate over about 0.7% (actually I disagree with this figure but that's another issue) and are effedtively prepared to pay $millions to strike breakers over about 0.7%...

 

[Platy]

Unbelievable - at a time when airlines are going broke, they should be happy to have a job, and doing all they can to keep them. Airlines are one of the hardest hit industries due to fuel costs. They shouldn't entertain any considerations for pay increases above CPI. Of course, I apply this concept at all levels.

I assume, sir, you would expect your own salary to keep up with inflation? Expect to be able to negotiate a pay rise accordingly (whether individually or collectively)? And have the gumption to stick up for yourself if you feel your employer is taking advantage of you?

Remember, the LAMEs haven't had a pay rise for over TWO years so you need to add two years of inflation (and maybe allow for the time period of the agreement moving forward) if you chose to set CPI as a benchmark for a "reasonable" pay claim.

And yes you are right, senior management have NOT set an example by showing any self restraint with their own packages sky rocketing in recent years - their pay freeze is only weeks old...

If you are an advocate of an IR system which relies on individuals and collective negotiation to set wage deals (rather than the older system of centralised wage fixing) then you should be prepared to observe various negotiations occur at large (especially when an employer likes to take their tactics into public propaganda and the employer/employer group has no choice but to follow suit).

Finally, people aren't always driven by money. A sense of self worth, self validation, job satisfaction, etc can be important (depending on the individual). Thus workplace culture and attitudes from management can be significant in securing employee satifaction and loyalty. Most QF employees tell me that their management doesn't listen to them. I've heard that Geoff Dixon is very rude to staff when on board (as opposed to James Strong who have personally seen very respectfully interacting with crew). So there is clearly a LOT that QF could do without relying on wages to solicit the loyalty of staff.

 

[rhjames]

By the same logic, the QF exec are effectively allowing a situation to escalate by refusing to negotiate over about 0.7% (actually I disagree with this figure but that's another issue) and are effedtively prepared to pay $millions to strike breakers over about 0.7%...

The cost is a lot more than implied. Even if future increases are based on CPI, that additional 0.7% becomes very significant in future years. It also sets a precedent that can flow on to other areas. I know of industries that found it easier to give in to union demands, until eventually they couldn't survive.

 

[rhjames]

I assume, sir, you would expect your own salary to keep up with inflation? Expect to be able to negotiate a pay rise accordingly (whether individually or collectively)? And have the gumption to stick up for yourself if you feel your employer is taking advantage of you?

Yes, and if they don't satisfy me I'll go elsewhere. To strike where innocent people are inconvenienced wouldn't be an option that would occur to me. However, I'm in a dufferent situation. I agree with much of what you say about staff self worth.

 

[Hvr]

Whilst I am not opposed with the fundamental right to withdraw labour, I disagree with striking being anything other than the absolute last resort in resolving workplace disputes. There is no evidence to suggest that striking delivers a beneficial outcome that is over and above what can be achieved by less militant behaviour.

Noting that this was posted late last year can anybody provide example of industrial action as described above being successful where the negotiations have essentially stalled?

Both parties have dug their heels in and neither appears to want to budge from their position.

So what next?

 

[Mal]

Qantas won't budge, unions won't budge. So who loses? The customers.

Customers turn away from Qantas and go to their more stable competitors. So who loses? Qantas and in turn the unions.

Nobody wins when these games are being played. And when the union keeps tempting Qantas to actually do something about them, then they may see some real action that they're not happy with. I fully support Qantas if they want to sack every last bludger and outsource maintenance anywhere they please.

You cannot bite the hand that feeds you without consequences that may outweigh the benefits.

Does this strike action remind anyone of a child throwing their toys out of the basket seeking attention?

 

[NM]

So what next?

Outsource

 

[bambbbam2]

Finally, people aren't always driven by money. A sense of self worth, self validation, job satisfaction, etc can be important

I always think it odd that people who say that are generally the ones going on strike to get paid more..

 

[rhjames]

I fully support Qantas if they want to sack every last bludger and outsource maintenance anywhere they please.

You cannot bite the hand that feeds you without consequences that may outweigh the benefits.

Does this strike action remind anyone of a child throwing their toys out of the basket seeking attention?

Harsh words, and I don't know if they're warranted - they may be, and perhaps you're close enough to the situation to know. Basically I doubt that I would support strike action under any circumstances. I've never understood how people expect to get more pay by reducing company profits with strike action. My policy has always been to work harder, longer hours, and more productively than anyone else, so I am too valuable to loose. Unfortunately, if a union is involved, you're no longer an individual.

 

[Platy]

I always think it odd that people who say that are generally the ones going on strike to get paid more..

Nice idea my friend, but unfortunately cloyed with glibness rather than substance.

For example, in my own case (the words in this case were mine after all), I have had my own small business for 13 years. I have never belonged to a union. (The exception has been paying student union fees, a totally different beast despite the idealogical deceptions of Howard). But I do recognise a need for individual people's IR interests to be looked after in a way that doesn't allow the employer complete power and control, in common with the majority of the federal electorate who sent the last mob packing and the WorkChoices brochures and agreements into the incinerator.

Incidentally, I have seen values based organisations at work, including both the Australian and Global operations of one the of the largest corporations in the world during their role out of such a program from the CEO down to the call centre officer. I have seen it actually work.

Qantas has very poor leadership in people and IR terms when compared to such organisations.

I think it odd myself that folk with the glib comments seem to offer so little of substance in actual debate, but of course that's just my own humble opinion as one of those who Howard used to call "the elite" owing to an extensive education.
.

 

[Mal]

I think which side of the argument I agree with should be quite obvious. I see it as quite simple - the LAME's are out to obstruct Qantas to win their small pay increase. When they win, they'll re-use the same tactics next time - so will the baggage handlers. And then time and time again they'll play the same strike tactics to get what they want. Children use it against parents to win what they want, partners use it sometimes as well. Obviously it works that well it needs to be used in the corporate environment.

Qantas needs to break this chain of caving in because their employees do the 'go slow', 'more paperwork', 'overtime ban', 'rolling stoppages' etc. It's the only way they can rein in these employees and unions.