Qantas apologises to customers for union strikes

[Meggsy]

The latest media release from Qantas over the ongoing IR saga. One can only imagine the battering they (QF) must be taking from a reputation point of view. Although I am sure the unions are not making too many friends now either.
View attachment Qantas Media Release.pdf

 

[thewinchester]

Commenting from a professional marketing/communications standpoint, I would say that QF's reputation and customer service management seems to be holding up and not taking anywhere near the battering the unions might hope to inflict.

I've seen very few reports in the press from complaining pax, their staff have been getting out in front of the issue including constantly talking to the press and affected customers, and management/back office has been moved onto the front lines where necessary and appropriate to alleviate delays.

If anything, I'd go as far as saying the union's strategy is starting to fail. It isn't having anywhere near the impact they might hope, their message is getting drowned out, and every one of their talking points is being shot down thanks to consistent, clear and logical messages from QF. Every step the union is taking is making them look like villains in this, particularly amongst those who grew up seeing the industrial unrest during the 80's and 90's and know how much of a stranglehold they had on the economy.

 

[Meggsy]

Totally agree thewinchester. The longer this drags on the more people will disagree with the unions actions and lose any sympathy. I think QF's contingency planning has been quite effective to date and kept disruptions to a minimum. I can say though that many of my colleagues are currently booking ALL flights with DJ, where possible, and saying its because of the nonsense going on at QF.

 

[dfcatch]

Commenting from a professional marketing/communications standpoint, I would say that QF's reputation and customer service management seems to be holding up and not taking anywhere near the battering the unions might hope to inflict.

I've seen very few reports in the press from complaining pax, their staff have been getting out in front of the issue including constantly talking to the press and affected customers, and management/back office has been moved onto the front lines where necessary and appropriate to alleviate delays.

If anything, I'd go as far as saying the union's strategy is starting to fail. It isn't having anywhere near the impact they might hope, their message is getting drowned out, and every one of their talking points is being shot down thanks to consistent, clear and logical messages from QF. Every step the union is taking is making them look like villains in this, particularly amongst those who grew up seeing the industrial unrest during the 80's and 90's and know how much of a stranglehold they had on the economy.

This is precisely where my view of the unions comes from

 

[samh004]

I’m all for unions, but they have too much power at the moment and have become greedy.

I’m all for the brand to fail to prove the point that they’re in the wrong, after all, if the brand fails, they have no job, and I’m not sure they understand that the people they’re trusting to speak for them might be heading towards that goal.

I doubt it’ll fail, but if it takes a battering, if profits slip, they still lose. In fact, the make the case stronger for what Qantas is trying to do. They’re blindly working towards Qantas’ goals.

 

[dfcatch]

I’m all for unions, but they have too much power at the moment and have become greedy.

I’m all for the brand to fail to prove the point that they’re in the wrong, after all, if the brand fails, they have no job, and I’m not sure they understand that the people they’re trusting to speak for them might be heading towards that goal.

I doubt it’ll fail, but if it takes a battering, if profits slip, they still lose. In fact, the make the case stronger for what Qantas is trying to do. They’re blindly working towards Qantas’ goals.

Precisely. That's exactly it.

The whole "us versus the greedy corporations" argument gets me going.

It's a fundamental lack of understanding that you need a profitable corporation to have jobs and pay increases.

No profit - no pay rise.
No corporation - no job.

And even worse is the public service attitude of "oh the government has plenty of money - they can afford to pay us more".

IMHO.

 

[cove]

Because we are waiting for 2 to arrive from Perth into Los Angeles I can see how 8,000 passengers delayed has a big multiplier effect which in our case messes 8 around.
If that multiplier applies as an average then 32,000 people are being put on edge each day.

 

[Sprucegoose]

Totally agree thewinchester. The longer this drags on the more people will disagree with the unions actions and lose any sympathy. I think QF's contingency planning has been quite effective to date and kept disruptions to a minimum. I can say though that many of my colleagues are currently booking ALL flights with DJ, where possible, and saying its because of the nonsense going on at QF.

And we all know the hardest part is attracting customers through the door. Thus is quite dangerous for Qantas, especially if those flyers have a positive DJ experience. They may repeat their next purchase with DJ as well,post strike.

 

[browski]

Precisely. That's exactly it.

The whole "us versus the greedy corporations" argument gets me going.

It's a fundamental lack of understanding that you need a profitable corporation to have jobs and pay increases.

No profit - no pay rise.
No corporation - no job.

And even worse is the public service attitude of "oh the government has plenty of money - they can afford to pay us more".

IMHO.

And how much profit is enough?
Remember Qantas is a very profitable airline and still they are looking to move jobs offshore. So the staff are striking. Seems reasonable to me.

 

[dfcatch]

And how much profit is enough?
Remember Qantas is a very profitable airline and still they are looking to move jobs offshore. So the staff are striking. Seems reasonable to me.

Profit is not a crime last time I checked. I want Qantas to be a successful airline, providing reasonable value to me as a customer.

They pay excessive wages - we all pay for it through higher fares/reduced service. Or worse - the Jetstarisation of further routes.

The unions only have themselves to blame for Qantas seeking a lower cost base through JQ and Jetconnect etc.

Ultimately - if staff aren't satisfied, they can go work somewhere else.

If Qantas fail to provide good value - I can fly with another airline.

It's a free world - and there's no free rides.

 

[browski]

Profit is not a crime last time I checked. I want Qantas to be a successful airline, providing reasonable value to me as a customer.

They pay excessive wages - we all pay for it through higher fares/reduced service. Or worse - the Jetstarisation of further routes.

The unions only have themselves to blame for Qantas seeking a lower cost base through JQ and Jetconnect etc.

Ultimately - if staff aren't satisfied, they can go work somewhere else.

If Qantas fail to provide good value - I can fly with another airline.

It's a free world - and there's no free rides.

So by your logic, aussie farmers only have themselves to blame for paying themselves too much. Best to move the farming offshore.
And the factories only have themselves to blame for paying Aussies too much; so best they move the jobs off shore.

If only you could move those taxi driver jobs off shore.

 

[Robert K]

So by your logic, aussie farmers only have themselves to blame for paying themselves too much. Best to move the farming offshore.
And the factories only have themselves to blame for paying Aussies too much; so best they move the jobs off shore.

If only you could move those taxi driver jobs off shore.

Finally. Someone that gets it

 

[Hvr]

I’m all for unions, but they have too much power at the moment and have become greedy. ..

The union per se has no power. It consists of members, i.e. the workers who combine to have a voice. Therefore it appears you are saying the workers have too much power and their opinions should be quashed.

Profit is not a crime last time I checked. I want Qantas to be a successful airline, providing reasonable value to me as a customer.

They pay excessive wages - we all pay for it through higher fares/reduced service. Or worse - the Jetstarisation of further routes.

The unions only have themselves to blame for Qantas seeking a lower cost base through JQ and Jetconnect etc. ...

It is too easy to just blame the unions. If Qantas are paying excessive wages then it must be because management was too incompetent to actually manage and ensure that wages didn't become excessive.

There are several parties in this dispute and the employees are just one. It is rare that employers ever rock up and say here's a pay rise. Employees have to justify their wage increases, and in some cases fight for them.

I wonder if Qantas truly share their management strategy with their employees and tell them exactly what is going on and why they are adopting a particular position?

Surely there is a place for good faith bargaining by both sides? The employer/employee relationship will continue after this dispute, therefore it is in everyone's interest to resolve this dispute sooner rather than later.

 

[straitman]

Slightly OT for here but there were a lot of people in Nadi tonight who suddenly did not like Qantas as there were a lot of bags who had gone on different holidays than their owners. The missing baggage line was almost as long as the customs line. All that I spoke to were people who had Qantas connections in SYD today.

We are only missing one of low importance.

 

[drron]

So by your logic, aussie farmers only have themselves to blame for paying themselves too much. Best to move the farming offshore.
And the factories only have themselves to blame for paying Aussies too much; so best they move the jobs off shore.

If only you could move those taxi driver jobs off shore.

Aussie farmers are price takers not makers.They are at the mercy of the processors or retailers.Though some are taking the step of doing their own retailing.
Thats why I frequent Farmers Markets and always buy local milk from small producers.I am doing my bit and i will have no sympathy for you when you complain that when coles and woollies have destroyed most small producers the prices go up for inferior produce.

 

[dfcatch]

So by your logic, aussie farmers only have themselves to blame for paying themselves too much. Best to move the farming offshore.
And the factories only have themselves to blame for paying Aussies too much; so best they move the jobs off shore.

1/ I'm not discussing the economy more widely - I'm specifically talking about IR - and specifically whether I feel the unions are in the right in their aggressive negotiation approach.

In this instance - I feel that the union is only doing their members a disservice - and ultimately, if they don't like the offer - they can leave and work elsewhere. I mean really - it's like a spoilt child, and I don't believe that holding the innocent traveling public to ransom is fair play.

If only you could move those taxi driver jobs off shore.

Last time I caught a taxi in Melbourne I was under the impression that they already had been

The union per se has no power. It consists of members, i.e. the workers who combine to have a voice. Therefore it appears you are saying the workers have too much power and their opinions should be quashed..

No - I'm talking about the union leadership. The workers are sheep. Sheep do what they're told. (And of course - if I were in their shoes I would go along with it too...) If the union leadership said "Let's accept their offer" the workers would instantly do so. Sheep with rights, sheep with desires to take home more money to feed the family, and sheep who can ultimately choose to either:

1/ Accept whatever offer QF management put before them.

2/ Reject it and work elsewhere.

3/ As stated above - industrial action that inconveniences the traveling public is not on in my opinion, wins the union (and the workers) few supporters, and comes across as spoilt brats.

For the record - I'm also a sheep, but if I don't like the results of my EBA negotiations, I can leave and find something better elsewhere. Or else I can stay and put up with it.

It is too easy to just blame the unions. If Qantas are paying excessive wages then it must be because management was too incompetent to actually manage and ensure that wages didn't become excessive.

There are several parties in this dispute and the employees are just one. It is rare that employers ever rock up and say here's a pay rise. Employees have to justify their wage increases, and in some cases fight for them.

I wonder if Qantas truly share their management strategy with their employees and tell them exactly what is going on and why they are adopting a particular position?

Surely there is a place for good faith bargaining by both sides? The employer/employee relationship will continue after this dispute, therefore it is in everyone's interest to resolve this dispute sooner rather than later.

I never said that the wages "are/were" excessive. I said (or I meant) if they were to be excessive...

I'm also not defending QF management's world-class employee engagement policies either

Yeah there is room for good faith - but IMHO the union blew it the minute they went on strike. QF is running a business, and IMHO the union's demands are unreasonable.

They fail to understand and accept the basic fact that QF want to lower their cost base and have more flexibility. And if the union won't let them do that, then QF will simply cede more routes to JQ, and shift new focuses to offshore areas etc.

The union could win the battle - but will most certainly lose the war.

Ultimately the ones who lose the most in this situation are the workers - the same sheep who in good faith went along with the promises from the union officials of the 40 virgins etc etc....(aka. job security and a higher raise).

 

[lmere12]

Aussie farmers are price takers not makers.They are at the mercy of the processors or retailers.Though some are taking the step of doing their own retailing.<br>
Thats why I frequent Farmers Markets and always buy local milk from small producers.I am doing my bit and i will have no sympathy for you when you complain that when coles and woollies have destroyed most small producers the prices go up for inferior produce.

AGREED !!! I'm a banana farmer and the chains dictate the prices

 

[ric_melb]

You can hardly say that Qantas is a very profitable airline. This year they made a net profit of $249 million, on shareholders funds of $6,151 million. A return of some 4%, which is inadequate. Shareholders have not had a dividend for 2.5 years.
I heard Purvinas on ABC today. Apart from the fact he has trouble pronouncing Qantas, he has some very strange ideas.
He says that the Engineers Union will step up industrial action from 10 October, and could continue action for up to a year.
He recommends passengers book on airlines other than Qantas. (Seems strange to me that you would recommend less passengers for Qantas, and hence less need for Qantas engineers.) Interpreting what he said I am lead to believe that he wants to cripple Qantas to such a level that the present Board is replaced by a new Board, and then Qantas will stage a stunning recovery with no expansion from a KL/Singapore hub, but all jobs retained in Australia, and growth from here. I have to say I don't agree that his vision will work.

 

[browski]

You can hardly say that Qantas is a very profitable airline. This year they made a net profit of $249 million, on shareholders funds of $6,151 million. A return of some 4%, which is inadequate. Shareholders have not had a dividend for 2.5 years.

Well according to dfcatch, if the shareholders and management don't like it, they can just buy shares in another company. Geez, there are no free lunches you know.

 

[dfcatch]

Well according to dfcatch, if the shareholders and management don't like it, they can just buy shares in another company. Geez, there are no free lunches you know.

Management's job is to maximise shareholder value.

And yes - as a non-QF shareholder, I can choose to invest elsewhere.

If I was a QF shareholder - then I expect the board to adhere to its duties to increase my value.

The shareholders own the company, management is their proxy.

The workers are employed to do a job, and in consideration of that job are rewarded with pay and benefits.

Management has made an offer for new pay and benefits (and negotiations have gone back and forth), it doesn't matter where it stops - at the end of the day the employees have two choices:

1/ Take the offer

or

2/ Reject the offer.

IMHO - if you are choosing option 2 - then don't let the door hit you on the a#$e on the way out.

Now - you're entitled to your opinion as to whether management negotiates in good faith, or whether the "poor workers" deserve more etc etc, but they also need to recognise that they should be grateful for even having a job.

Many people are not so fortunate, and I'm sure there are plenty who would love to work at QF.


You are welcome to your opinion, you are welcome to feel more sympathy for the workers and the union than I do, you (as a traveling member of the public) may be more tolerant of industrial disruption than I am, but it doesn't change the facts - so by all means argue and debate, but no need to act like a childish brat.

Apologies if you have forgotten the use of smileys.


PS. If the workers or unions don't like it - they can always buy the company and then run it the way they choose to.