Admin Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Get set for the new Qantas anthem ‘I-now-call-Singapore-home’ February 10, 2011 – 6:49 pm, by Ben Sandilands The rhetoric in the Qantas pilots dispute today is more bitter than anything heard in airline circles since the infamous pilot strike of 1989. But it is not otherwise similar to that brawl, which provoked the strongest anti-union reaction from a Labor Government since Ben Chifley used troops to break a coal miner strike in July 1949. Instead this brawl, whether it leads to a Qantas pilot strike or not, is one that is set to force Canberra to deal with the ‘I-now-call-Singapore-home’ effect in which Qantas is shifting its flying and its resources offshore, in contravention of the purpose of the Qantas Sale Act, and preparing to import foreign pilots to undercut Australian pilot pay. The business plan of the current Qantas management, to de-Australianise Qantas, and continue to sacrifice ‘costly’ legacy flight and maintenance arrangements through outsourcing, is something the Gillard government and Abbott opposition haven’t been prepared to contemplate. But in this sense, that of forcing itself into the political arena, it is an incredibly risky dispute for both Qantas and the pilots to engage in. Both sides know this. They had their lobbyists on the ground in Canberra at various times this week and last. As far as strike action goes, even if there is an overwhelming vote for protected action on the floor at off duty pilot meetings tomorrow and on Monday, a formal ballot will be required of all pilots, and any consequent disruption to Qantas flights would be weeks away. (Easter sounds good.) The reality for Qantas has already been signaled by its CEO, Alan Joyce. The international business is unsustainable, and in need of serious investment. Less clearly signaled was the culpability of his management in further running the product up against the wall by failing to correct (so far) the disastrous fleet planning errors by his predecessors, and removing the engine shop that actually kept the aged Rolls-Royce engines reliable on its clapped out 747 fleet, followed by a cluster of failures that has damaged customer confidence in the carrier. As for the world headline grabbing A380 incident, Qantas under Joyce has learned nothing about avoiding self harm, embracing a power-by-the-hour deal for those Rolls-Royce engines in which it found itself left ignorant of issues that were known to the manufacturer. Internationally Qantas is being destroyed by better product being flown more directly to more destinations, and has tried to find an answer across its overseas and domestic networks by transferring assets to a Jetstar product that its higher yielding customers detest. These management failings give the pilots nowhere to go other than to take their skills and experience to Emirates, Cathay Pacific or Singapore Airlines, all of whom are carving up Qantas up in terms of product and schedule. At yesterday’s meetings between the Australian and International Pilots Association and Qantas management including Oldmeadow Consulting ((a firm associated in the union’s mind with the supplying of strike breakers) both sides dug in deeply. Neither side agreed on how much a proposed pilot pay and productivity deal from the association would cost, and the key point was that the company refused point blank to contemplate any deal which wrote in job security. This morning Qantas had not made any further comment on the dispute. However the association hardened its language, with a statement headed ‘Tragedy looms for QANTAS as hard line management trashes its brand, seeks to smash its pilots.’ It said: QANTAS is on the brink this morning as a questionable management team shows its contempt for its workforce by refusing to negotiate job security in return for improved flexibility and productivity. President of the Australian and International Pilots Association Barry Jackson said the situation was a tragedy, with management seemingly eager to destroy its relationship with loyal workers. “We are witnessing the demise of an icon through mismanagement. This is not the first time some of the Qantas managers have been through this. Many were centrally involved in the destruction of Ansett and Australian Airlines and back then, as they are today, the same industrial consultants are advising them. If Qantas disappears they will have wiped out all of the founding entities in Australian aviation.” “This dispute is about jobs and whether there will be a recognizable aviation industry based in Australia in the future. Mr. Jackson said that the degradation of QANTAS mainline has not stopped at the first subsidiary. “Jetstar is now being undercut and off-shored at every opportunity, with the imminent formation of more off-shore bases proudly announced by Mr. Joyce at recent Company roadshows.” ………………………………………………………………………………………. Is Qantas ditching unaffordable excellence? February 10, 2011 – 8:09 pm, by Ben Sandilands Here is something risky to think about in the context of the dispute between Qantas and the Australian and International Pilots Association over job security. If Qantas were to remove the burden of excellence from its balance sheet, those pilot training, maintenance and standards costs that do more than just tick the boxes that make the carrier legal, what are the chances of disaster striking? The answer is obvious. They would be the same chances that apply to other carriers who do the absolute minimum but claim to be conforming with ‘world’s best practice’, because in the weasel words of air safety standards, ‘best practice’ and ‘minimum required practice’ are identical. The probability of a ‘hull loss’ which is a euphemism risk assessors use for a heap of dead people on world wide newscasts is probably one disaster every 25-30 years for a large airline. This means that any such airline might not have a very bad accident for 50 years, or not until tomorrow. But if the company is saving $200 million a year by dispensing with excess excellence, meaning anything which is in excess of the minimum required to be able to claim conformity with ‘world’s best practice’, it will be more than several billion dollars ahead within a decade, and an accident could happen anyhow. Because ‘**** happens’ as Tony Abbott so lucidly put it the other day. This is what is troubling about the apparently urgent need for Qantas to put an end to the unsustainable losses on its long haul operations, as flagged by Qantas CEO Alan Joyce a week ago in an address to the Melbourne Press Club. The company has persisted with a failed network concept and a failed re-equipment program and uncompetitive products and seems determined to try and solve these issues by off shoring some of its assets and costs through the device of basing Australian registered aircraft in Singapore. The small beginnings of a major shift in strategy. It closed an engine shop that was critical to keeping its aged fleet of Rolls-Royce powered 747s safe over the far southern ocean routes or across the Pacific to North America. It deals itself out of knowledge and oversight over the engines Rolls-Royce put on its flagship A380s, only to put better versions on those supplied to other A380 operators without telling Qantas a thing until one of them rips itself apart, and tears 27 holes through the wing in the process, on the November 4 flight of one its A380s from Singapore to Sydney. At the tense meeting between itself, its strike breaker contractor and the union yesterday Qantas refuses to consider anything that might give job security to the pilots that are the best trained in the world. Why? There are several possible reasons for this. The widely discussed possible reason is that Qantas is determined to end the employment of pilots under ‘legacy’ terms and conditions and churn them back, through Jetstar, under different agreements. The less widely discussed reason refers to nebulous statements from Jetstar about the setting up of a pilot resource from which non Australian pilots flying elsewhere on the Jetstar franchises could perform flying in Australia for Jetstar at favorable rates. No doubt like those of guest workers in the building industry employed on temporary visas. If such an arrangement is set up for Jetstar there is no reason why it then couldn’t be applied to Qantas, what’s left of it. The bizarre situation arises now that Qantas has a cadre of pilots who appear to have a longer term loyalty to the carrier than its management. The former are prepared to put standards ahead of remuneration if it keeps the carrier truly Australian. The latter don’t want to know about it. It isn’t clear if Qantas has thought through the consequences of undercutting and severing those legacy costs that are its brand ‘premium’. It is clear however that Alan Joyce has calculated the immediate consequences of not lifting productivity at Qantas, and this is where there is considerable pain and bafflement and anger in pilot ranks. They are prepared to lift productivity and keep pay in check. Surely there must yet be room in this stand off for Joyce to make different, more constructive choices, that will engage and retain that part of the Qantas legacy which is priceless. [ATTACH]13152.vB[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]10964[/ATTACH] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Yawn, more of the usual anti-business leftmedia hype... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Yawn...yawn Gnarly etc. What have you to contribute to the continuing disgraceful saga of what the finance industry is not doing to promote Australia's iconic airline? After all it was a close run thing that qantas avoided being sold to Alco Finance ( an operation that was quickly claimed as a casualty of the bankster's raid on the world economy). What wquld we now be saying about a certain CEO who literally grabbed the cash bundle and fled. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Student Pilot Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Just look at the latest profit from Qantas, that just contradicts everything Joyce say's. If you read anything to do with Australian airlines in the last couple of years you will know there is a problem. It starts with GA and goes right through now to international. From the bottom people are paying to fly for companies just to get hours up, that's after they or their parents have paid something like $100,00+ for training. That mentality carries through to charter with pilots paying to crew bankruns. Then when they get to Airlines the like's of Dash 8's they earn less than a taxi driver. Just look on the net for the likes of REX terms and conditions of pilots. After getting some time up with regionals people then pay for Airbus or 737 endorsments to start on low wages for the likes of Jetsar and Virgin. A starter first officer's wages is still less than a Sydney taxi driver. If it was just the low renumiration that would be bad enough, the conditions and workload WILL contribute to a serious accident soon. To say "Yawn, more of the usual anti-business leftmedia hype..." is either ignorance or worse still some company interference in public comment which does happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Granted the wages and conditions are rotten... but if Sydney Taxi drivers are on better money than starting pay for a VB ( I would guess this would be more accurate for JQ and Tiger) pilot then I want to be a Sydney taxi driver!!! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 I agree with Student Pilot- The comment from Gnu is offensive if not actually a malicious attempt by friends of Qantas management to interfere in legitimate (and timely ) free debate. Do these people believe in free speech or are they rich people who would stifle debate (if they had their way)? Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spin Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Offensive why Don, because he doesn't share your viewpoint? Last time I checked expressing an opinion was still allowed on here. For the record I don't really agree with Gnarly either, however there is no doubt that both sides are guilty of gilding the lily when putting forward their arguments, I'm rather tired of always having to read between the lines in the media reports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thx1137 Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Many people find dismissive and attacking comments offensive spin. A difference of opinion doesnt come into it. Gnarly says that if you think something is wrong at qantas that you are anti-business and hyping up the issues. No facts to refute the articles, just a comment about the person who makes the comments credibility. I am with don... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Argument, if it is to be meaningful, requires an alternative view to be reasoned and lucidly expressed so that the audience is informed. To bombastically condemn a thoughtfully researched and written report using hackneyed political speak is both insulting and offensive to other readers. We all know about opinions....everyone has one. Doesn't mean that to display an ugly one adds to the sum of knowledge.Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Relax folks. Let the free market run.... if it is more profitable driving a taxi then do just that. If you don't like the pay and conditions then look for another job. Still want to fly, then buy an aircraft and start your own airline or charter operation. I'm just saying whinging (in the article) just isn't the Australian way. Besides if Qantas get it wrong they won't survive so that is their problem to worry about, for all his superior knowledge has the author actually operated an airline? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 If you don't like the pay just look for another job...? Some of us care more for the future of our society and its industry than our hip pockets and thank goodness for that. If that is the attitude we all adopted things would be seriously screwed because just leaving for better money doesn't do any good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 I agree Winsor, Student Pilot was talking about the pay - be believes it is too low. Qantas will pay what the market demands. If they have trouble getting pilots as the pilots have left to drive taxis the pay rate on offer will increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 No it won't Gnarly Gnu... The standard will drop. There are plenty of youngsters who will jump at the opportunity to fly a Jumbo for $42000/year just for bragging rights and always will be. Its up to us more experienced battlers to educate them out of this mindset. I see it every day and it makes me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
727engineer Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Most of the Qantas staff i know are on a great wicket. The 4000 hour jetstar pilots who want to hold @ 15 until they can see the ground don't deserve a payrise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spin Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 To bombastically condemn .......Don Don if playing the man rather than the ball is your definition of reasoned discussion, then we're not likely to agree. It's an emotive subject, but let's at least try and rise above the sort of tripe dished up in the press shall we? Pilot wages at least at the more senior end of the spectrum, have tended to be quite sharply cyclical depending on where the industry is at. Entry level has as far as I know always paid starvation wages. I have friends in various widebody fleets around the world that have gone from reasonable wages to living like minor royalty within a relatively short space of time, however those same people are now fighting a rearguard action to preserve their lifestyle because just at the moment the airlines hold the upper hand in negotiations. Yes it is hard on individuals and I certainly don't hold with creating unsafe conditions, however the various unions have not been above scaremongering in the press to advance their cause - my objection boils down to the crying wolf scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
727engineer Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 If CASA didn't waste your and my tax money trying to dream up ideas to over-regulate and already over-regulated industry, then we would have more money to pay pilots rather than the massive amount of admin staff. One of our pilots apparently can't speak english anymore according to CASA.... But if you dare to question them, they are empowered enough to drive your small aviation business into the ground, a power which they flaunt regularly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I think this issue is about local wages... the overseas situation is not the concern. Something is rotten locally and the airlines are happy to push the wages as low as they can. Just look at the ground services situation... in a very short span of time wages went from being reasonable for the work and conditions with strong support from a local union to mostly contractors who are paying peanuts thus employing monkeys... and all people will say is "If you don't like it find another job"... Fortunately for the travelling public there are still people who have a passion for this work and they are keeping the skys safe rather than just leaving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robinsm Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I thought the issue was about the outsourcing of the Qantas work overseas when we have the competent staff here. Am I naive or has the Qantas reputation suffered by placing this work overseas and not haveing the same high standard of QA we used to have. Obviousy the bottom line rules in place of looking after the people who care and matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts