QF Engineers set to strike !

[oz_mark]

Errors of all sorts are made all the time. The important thing to bear in mind is that procesures are designed recognising this, enabling for corrections to those errors before anything really bad happens.

 

[rhjames]

Re: View from 11D on ZK-JTP

rhjames,

There are many reasons why an incorrect part could have been fitted and procedures would always be assessed to work out how and why it could have happened. It is more important though, that the error was picked up than worrying about whether they would have flown that night or not.

I agree it's reassuring that the error was picked up. However, for the sake of efficiency, I question why such an error was possible. I know nothing about aircraft maintenance. However, as a design engineer, I understand that each model plane would have a clear ID, and every part is clearly identified for that plane. It's hard to judge without knowing the full story. We're also getting a bit "off topic".

 

[serfty]

... We're also getting a bit "off topic".

Not really OT.

The point I believe is that clear information was fudged - using the rules to ensure a negative result to the carrier.

The problem can be described by one word - LEGACY

 

[straitman]

Not really OT.

The point I believe is that clear information was fudged - using the rules to ensure a negative result to the carrier.

The problem can be described by one word - LEGACY

I actually thought about posting something similar but decided to drop it as I thought it was to obvious :!:

 

[JohnK]

The point I believe is that clear information was fudged - using the rules to ensure a negative result to the carrier.

Are you saying that someone is deliberately making mistakes to ensure delays in scheduled operations?

 

[rhjames]

Are you saying that someone is deliberately making mistakes to ensure delays in scheduled operations?

Wow, this never occurred to me. I put such a crime alongside some of the worst I can think of. Deliberate degradation of personal integrity to the detriment of others. I don't believe any properly qualified engineer would stoop so low.

 

[serfty]

Are you saying that someone is deliberately making mistakes to ensure delays in scheduled operations?

Not deliberately making "mistakes" - I employed the words "using the rules". The implication being that ordinarily, while the rules would be followed, extra efforts would be made within the rules to ensure any delay is minimized. In the case in point no such 'extra effort' was apparent.

Maybe the parts were the same, but needed to be a NZ part rather than an Oz part due to the ZK registration. Again, that is conjecture.

 

[straitman]

Maybe the parts were the same, but needed to be a NZ part rather than an Oz part due to the ZK registration. Again, that is conjecture.

For the skeptics out there this is a very real possibility.

 

[rhjames]

Getting back to the original thread topic, I don't recall any significant disruptions over Christmas or Easter. However, the talk of strikes worries me. I find it hard to justify a strike under any circumstances other than legitimate safety issues. Awards contain procedures for dispute resolution, which includes the use of external conciliation and arbitration. From my experience, strikes occur when unions choose to bypass these (illegally). For the first time in about 10 years last Friday I drove past a group of workers in a Sydney street proudly holding signs saying that they were "on strike". I don't understand - I would think that they'd be ashamed. I fear that these will become more frequent.

 

[steve-b]

Hi there,

As yet-another unfortunate victim of Qantas' cruel joke of the wage dispute between the mechanics and management, I and many others suffered this first-hand Saturday when QF 11 went through a 20 hour ordeal at Sydney airport to get to Los Angeles. We as frequent-flyers stated receiving SMS messages 0900 Saturday of potential delays but to turn up anyway for our scheduled 1320 flight. Turning up at check-in, we were given the news that our flight was going to be "a few hours late" as the plane was in hangar. So we stupidly checked in and went through security. Upon getting to the gate, we were then informed that the flight had been put back to 1700, off the side "due to the problem with the mechanics". Come 1530, the flight was again delayed to 1730. Come 1630 the flight was then delayed to 1930. Come 1700 the flight was delayed to 2100. Come 1800 the flight was delayed to 2200, just before Sydney airport closing time which was 9 hours post scheduled time. No matter whom you spoke to from Qantas, regardless if you are a Qantas Frequent Flyer or ordinary punter, multiple stories were told from the staff at Sydney airport, and more infuriating was that upon checking between 2 people who would approach the SAME Qantas staff member, 2 DIFFERENT stories were frequently given on what was going on. There were no offers of booking you onto another Qantas flight, of course since the airline had known since 0900 the flight was doomed, Qantas deliberately did NOT put people onto one of their 3 other flights to Los Angeles or San Francisco, just stuck all of us with no good reason. For all the 10 hours of pain we endured, we were given a lousy $ 15 meal token -- accident and crime victims are given more compensation.

Onboard the staff were very surely and outright rude to the most part, smashing trolleys into seats, noisy, a very "here you go or else" type of attitude -- seems they must be learning from their American counterparts..

The flight landed almost 10 hours late to Los Angeles, where the fun really ensued as disgruntled Qantas/American Airlines staff hurriedly gave you a piece of paper with what your connecting flight now was. Upon trudging across Los Angeles airport with all your luggage to another carrier, where you were supposed to be grateful for a flight with them, you then found out that an essential code for reallocating passengers was NOT on the piece of paper Qantas had forced onto you. If you were successful, which some weren't, the other airline begrudgingly took you on.

Anyone who thinks that business travel for work is glamourous, figure that I spent 35 hours awake over the weekend to get to Las Vegas for a business conference and am waking up on Sunday AM (having had 2 Saturday's) completely wrecked. It is time for the government to step in and either put a bullet into Qantas' head, or force this dispute to be stopped. Passengers pay for the " privledge" of flying and being put through the inhumanity that Qantas is doing is criminal. In any other country outside of Australia, and the EU, significant financial penalties on a per-passenger basis would have taken effect at 4 and 8 hours of delay, just not here. We don't want to upset the precious Qantas apple-cart.


Demands for some form of compensation from Qantas have been ignored.

 

[AnonymousCoward]

Awards contain procedures for dispute resolution, which includes the use of external conciliation and arbitration. From my experience, strikes occur when unions choose to bypass these (illegally).

Isn't the issue here that the award is set to expire? In such a case there is no dispute requiring arbitration (or mediation). Instead the parties need to agree on a new award.

Presumably, if talks drag on forever, then engineers would be paid less and less (in real terms) as talks continue. So at some point, when no longer bound by a contract (or award) then a worker has the right to refuse to supply their labour. That's what a strike typically is. Lkewise the company can refuse to continue to buy the labour (a lockout or replacement of workers with alternatives)

 

[AnonymousCoward]

Not quite - CPI is 2.4%. 3% plus 1% is 4%. So the offer being rejected is already 67% above CPI. Very generous.

Well, I would note that the March quarter CPI (year on year) was 4.2%, so significantly above what figure you are quoting back in Jan.

If the engineers had taken 3% back then, they'd be worse off in real terms now.

Whilst I'm not some union sympathiser, I have no doubt that everyone else in that company (management included) is there to look out for their own best interests (I note that executive compensation continues to rise at a fairly rapid rate ). I don't see why engineers shouldn't either.

 

[simongr]

(I note that executive compensation continues to rise at a fairly rapid rate )

Is that ignoring the recent freeze on executive increases and the deferral of pay reviews for managers?

Given the current global "crisis" in airline travel I think this is fairly short sighted by Oz engineers. This is just giving the board the excuse to move jobs off shore. Not only do they have the cost justification but they will now have public opinion on their side as people see services being cut, travel becoming more expensive and engineers actions being perceived to be cause of delays. Union leaders have the interests of the union members at their core but these need to be long rather than short term.

 

[rhjames]

Isn't the issue here that the award is set to expire? In such a case there is no dispute requiring arbitration (or mediation). Instead the parties need to agree on a new award.

Presumably, if talks drag on forever, then engineers would be paid less and less (in real terms) as talks continue. So at some point, when no longer bound by a contract (or award) then a worker has the right to refuse to supply their labour. That's what a strike typically is. Lkewise the company can refuse to continue to buy the labour (a lockout or replacement of workers with alternatives)

It's a few years since I was involved in negotiating renewed awards, however I doubt it's changed that much. The procedure was that both sides negotiated. If agreement couldn't be reached, it was taken to arbitration. At this stage, it was common for a strike to be called, just to show some muscle. A strike at this stage was illegal, but would always end with a verbal reprimand to the union (which they laughed at). Arbitration normally ordered more talks, and a few hearings later, would assist in reaching a conclusion. Any strike action throughout this process was useless, and just bit the hand that fed the employees - in fact it just slowed up the procedures.

Perhaps someone can fill me in on current procedure. As far as I am aware, any strike or disruptive action by employees is counter productive to all concerned. There are better alternatives through mediation and arbitration.

 

[serfty]

I perceive one of the issues being that Qantas know they can get the same quality maintenance engineering work done overseas at far less cost. This is of course, contrary to what the engineer's union would have you believe.

(Staples? It's now known this was done in Australia , not in Asia as "Today Tonight" would have us believe!)

In reality Qantas is a "Legacy" carrier, one of those legacies is inflated pay rates for many staff.

The union should get real; take the 3% - much more than that and they will have a lot less employed members ...

 

[AnonymousCoward]

Given the current global "crisis" in airline travel I think this is fairly short sighted by Oz engineers. This is just giving the board the excuse to move jobs off shore.

Oh - I agree 100%.

 

[AnonymousCoward]

It's a few years since I was involved in negotiating renewed awards, however I doubt it's changed that much. The procedure was that both sides negotiated. If agreement couldn't be reached, it was taken to arbitration.

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 )

At this stage, it was common for a strike to be called, just to show some muscle. A strike at this stage was illegal, but would always end with a verbal reprimand to the union (which they laughed at). Arbitration normally ordered more talks, and a few hearings later, would assist in reaching a conclusion.

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

As far as I am aware, any strike or disruptive action by employees is counter productive to all concerned. There are better alternatives through mediation and arbitration.

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.

 

[rhjames]

The union should get real; take the 3% - much more than that and they will have a lot less employed members ...

3% is an acceptable increase, and in line with CPI, which was just under 3% for 2007. They should be happy with this. The union probably argues about petrol prices etc. They have to realise that Qantas isn't responsible for compensating for this - in fact they are also suffering from this. The fact is that Qantas achieves high air fares, yet their planes are full, They get away with this due to reliability and service, and stayed in business when many airlines went bust. To me, this demonstrates good management. The union members should be thankful that they have a job, and increases in line with CPI.

 

[Keith009]

3% is an acceptable increase, and in line with CPI, which was just under 3% for 2007. They should be happy with this. The union probably argues about petrol prices etc. They have to realise that Qantas isn't responsible for compensating for this - in fact they are also suffering from this. The fact is that Qantas achieves high air fares, yet their planes are full, They get away with this due to reliability and service, and stayed in business when many airlines went bust. To me, this demonstrates good management. The union members should be thankful that they have a job, and increases in line with CPI.

100% agree.

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

 

[Evan]

Also lets not forget that the last few years have also seen some tax cuts to the effective wage increase is a little more.
My company has 2.5% for 3 years arrangement and it was a simple as that or the company will cut heads since they run on very slim profits.
E