Qantas workers prepare to strike

Status
Not open for further replies.

Yada Yada

Established Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,877
Points
0
www.smh.com.au said:
Qantas workers prepare to strike
By Scott Rochfort
February 24, 2006

QANTAS heavy maintenance workers are mobilising for strike action after the national carrier unexpectedly called off enterprise bargaining talks with unions yesterday.

Adding confusion to the situation, Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon called off a briefing slated for this morning where he was expected to announce whether the airline would outsource its widebody heavy maintenance overseas.

Qantas's head of people, Kevin Brown, said Qantas called off the "engineering transformation" update because of last-minute delays but said a decision was imminent.

"There are some discussions with some other interested parties that we … [have] not sorted out," he said. Mr Brown declined to say whether the "interested parties" included a foreign maintenance facility.

More...
This has been brewing for a while now. I wonder if QF have been delaying the decision until close to the Commonwealth Games to raise the stakes with the union?
 

Dave Noble

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
6,419
Points
0
They could be trying to delay it so that when they do announce it, it will be too close to the Games for them to arrange a strike during that period


Dave
 

NM

Enthusiast
Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2004
Messages
16,494
Points
1,295
Qantas
LT Gold
Virgin
Red
and won't striking just show everyone why Qantas needs to move the work away from the local Unions?
 

Yada Yada

Established Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,877
Points
0
NM said:
and won't striking just show everyone why Qantas needs to move the work away from the local Unions?

It would certainly make the unions look bad, which is perhaps why QF may be delaying the announcement. Clever play if that's the case. But I guess the unions might not care given what's at stake - their livelihood and existence.

There are lots of empty seats on O7 just waiting to be filled if QF is grounded.
 
S

shillard

Guest
NM said:
and won't striking just show everyone why Qantas needs to move the work away from the local Unions?

You would think that the communist fools might have learned their lesson from Ansett.

Rule #1 of survival - don't foul your own nest. These clowns can't even take a hint from across the Pacific (gee, why ARE so many US Airlines hitting the wall? 9/11? I don't think so, Tim.....).

Hopefully Dixon will fire the lot of the bludgers out of spite and give the work to people who are actually prepared to WORK.
 

dajop

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 1, 2002
Messages
12,685
Solutions
3
Points
1,345
Yada Yada said:
There are lots of empty seats on O7 just waiting to be filled if QF is grounded.

Lot might be a bit of an exaggeration .... 7 flights of a 60 seat aircraft running @50% load factor is not enough to take the pax of just 1 767 flight.

I think SQ could make some mileage out of it .... bet there already planning which aircraft they could divert here to transport stranded pax ..
 

MIKEs

Junior Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
13
Points
0
shillard said:
NM said:
and won't striking just show everyone why Qantas needs to move the work away from the local Unions?

You would think that the communist fools might have learned their lesson from Ansett.

Rule #1 of survival - don't foul your own nest. These clowns can't even take a hint from across the Pacific (gee, why ARE so many US Airlines hitting the wall? 9/11? I don't think so, Tim.....).

Hopefully Dixon will fire the lot of the bludgers out of spite and give the work to people who are actually prepared to WORK.

Ha, Dixon & co are only interested in Lining there own pockets they dont give a rats about there staff, hence wanting to move more jobs offshore, Why is it that QF has such an envious safety record??? Because its been performed by highly skilled trades people here in Australia :!: Not in some backlot in China or some other far flung outpost.
 

aus_flyer

Established Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2005
Messages
1,557
Points
415
Inside word on good authority is that maintenance will be moving offshore. The decision has been made - just not announced.
 

Gazza

Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2006
Messages
122
Points
0
I have a high opinion of Qantas staff, I cannot say the same about the senior management.

Their is no prize in the race for the lowest common denominator.
 
S

shillard

Guest
MIKEs said:
Ha, Dixon & co are only interested in Lining there own pockets they dont give a rats about there staff, hence wanting to move more jobs offshore, Why is it that QF has such an envious safety record??? Because its been performed by highly skilled trades people here in Australia :!: Not in some backlot in China or some other far flung outpost.

So what, yellow men can't maintain planes as well as white men? Bloody racist.

They want to move more jobs offshore because lazy bludger Australians continue to foul their own nest.

Because while QF is profitable, it is only so by airline standards. It can't hold a candle to businesses in other sectors.

Because lazy union bludgers want to drag everyone down to the lowest common denominator (witness the useless scrotes in dispute with Boeing @ Williamtown - terrified of an employment contract where higher performers are paid more, because that inevitably means the inverse also applies).

Who could blame them?
 

Gazza

Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2006
Messages
122
Points
0
Shillard

What make you assume that it will be MEN who maintain the planes? - bloody sexist

As a Kiwi I cant find it in me to stick up for Australians (unless you are from a non-ANZAC country).

If Qantas is such a bad business, suggest you start by giving the manager's a bullocking. They set the direction and tone of the organisation.

The vast majority of Qantas staff I have dealt with are excellent!
 
G

Guest

Guest
shillard said:
NM said:
and won't striking just show everyone why Qantas needs to move the work away from the local Unions?

You would think that the communist fools might have learned their lesson from Ansett.

Rule #1 of survival - don't foul your own nest. These clowns can't even take a hint from across the Pacific (gee, why ARE so many US Airlines hitting the wall? 9/11? I don't think so, Tim.....).

Hopefully Dixon will fire the lot of the bludgers out of spite and give the work to people who are actually prepared to WORK.

haha (y)
 

JohnK

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
43,731
Points
3,070
Don't we support China's economy enough already?
 
Now with contactless delivery, shop online to get drinks delivered to your door or pick up in-store in 30 minutes. Lowest Liquor Price Guarantee. Biggest Range.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

one9

Active Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
611
Points
240
JohnK said:
Don't we support China's economy enough already?

it is two way. china will support our economy by lowering costs and allowing qantas to provide greater returns to many australian shareholders, and australia will support china by providing more jobs for workers.

this is a great thing.

reducing costs is increasing efficiency. in fact by reducing costs, qantas, if they wanted could put more into safety and maitanence by spending the same dollars but getting higher quality parts and equipment (as less needs to be spent on wages).

the less of qantas's workforce that is unionised the better. this way qantas will operate with less disruptions from strikes and us as passengers will face less disruptions.
 

JohnK

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
43,731
Points
3,070
one9 said:
it is two way. china will support our economy by lowering costs and allowing qantas to provide greater returns to many australian shareholders, and australia will support china by providing more jobs for workers.

this is a great thing.

reducing costs is increasing efficiency. in fact by reducing costs, qantas, if they wanted could put more into safety and maitanence by spending the same dollars but getting higher quality parts and equipment (as less needs to be spent on wages).

the less of qantas's workforce that is unionised the better. this way qantas will operate with less disruptions from strikes and us as passengers will face less disruptions.
Agree with what you say but can't help thinking how Chinese products are cheap and inferior. Doesn't matter what you buy, whether it be clothes, appliances, household equipment, spare parts etc there is no quality, they do not last. I suppose you get what you pay for but.... I try to avoid Chinese products as much as possible and like to spend a little more to get a better quality product manufactured elsewhere, Japan, Germany, Sweden.

Will this be reflected in the maintenance? Cutting corners? Cheap parts used even though premium parts may be paid for by QF?

Suppose we will never know unless they get a chance to prove themselves. That decision is in the hands of others and I hope they are making the decision for the right reasons and do not sacriface safety just to save a few bucks that will only end up back in the executives hands as a bonus anyway.
 
G

Guest

Guest
does this mean QF will have the same awesome quality maintanence workers that Air China does?
 

Yada Yada

Established Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,877
Points
0
dajop said:
Lot might be a bit of an exaggeration .... 7 flights of a 60 seat aircraft running @50% load factor is not enough to take the pax of just 1 767 flight.
Yes, you're right. Although I was thinking of it from O7's perspective. 8)
 

Yada Yada

Established Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,877
Points
0
shillard said:
Rule #1 of survival - don't foul your own nest. These clowns can't even take a hint from across the Pacific (gee, why ARE so many US Airlines hitting the wall? 9/11? I don't think so, Tim.....).

Hopefully Dixon will fire the lot of the bludgers out of spite and give the work to people who are actually prepared to WORK.
Your comments would be fair if management applied the same standard to themselves. They are very highly paid - witness the recently departed head of IT who was on an enormous salary (>$1 million, IIRC). Not saying there is anything wrong with that in principle, but by your own admission QF "...can't hold a candle to businesses in other sectors" so perhaps it is time for a cleanout at the top.
 

JohnK

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
43,731
Points
3,070
Yada Yada said:
Your comments would be fair if management applied the same standard to themselves. They are very highly paid - witness the recently departed head of IT who was on an enormous salary (>$1 million, IIRC). Not saying there is anything wrong with that in principle, but by your own admission QF "...can't hold a candle to businesses in other sectors" so perhaps it is time for a cleanout at the top.
I think you are right. Rather than getting rid of more pawns the time might be right to clean out some top management.

A few years ago I received a notice for the AGM from a medium sized company I have shares in and noticed that one of the motions was to grant the managing director $750,000 worth of options "as incentive to perform his duties in the coming year". I thought his $2 million salary was incentive enough.
 

oz_mark

Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 30, 2002
Messages
19,217
Solutions
5
Points
1,440
Qantas shift hurts safety image: poll

There's a report in the Australian about how the safety image of Qantas will be hurt by shifting the maintenance overseas. See http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18281420%5E2702,00.html


QANTAS'S reputation for safety could take a battering if it defies popular opinion and moves at least 2500 heavy maintenance jobs overseas, a survey has found.

With the airline poised to announce a decision on its long-haul maintenance work as early as this week, the threat of industrial action has been heightened by what unions say is a surprising degree of support for a campaign to keep the work at home.

Several federal ministers and the federal Opposition have urged the airline to keep the work in Australia after the Howard Government's decision last week to protect Qantas from competition from Singapore Airlines on its lucrative US routes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top