Current Union Activity - Tide of support turned against them?

[muppet]

Can someone please explain the importance of public support?

Unions always look bad until it's over. Qantas... yes they have reputational risk. But Unions? They don't sell anything to the public, aren't elected by the publc and are answerable to their members and the FWO. Can't see the immediate rislk to them.

FYI - i do support unions but I agree there is a little bit of pooping in one's nest here. However, Joyce rubbishes QF constantly. So i don't think blame can rest with one party.

 

[ric_melb]

There was an interesting letter in The Australian yesterday. It detailed wages and conditions for baggage handlers.
If we assume the figures are correct, the package seems generous. I think it also illustrates that some Qantas employees are on old style generous packages, and are failing to realise we are in a different world now.

Handlers get paid upwards of 20 per cent above the industry rate and earnbetween $70,000 to $85,000 a year including penalty rates but not overtime.Overtime is paid at double time as are any public holidays and if they happen tobe rostered off on a public holiday they get a day off in lieu later on.
If they get called in to work by choice when rostered off, regardless of the time spent at work, they get paid a minimum four hours at double time.
There are a multitude of miscellaneous penalty rates paid as well. In addition to all this, Qantas baggage handlers get significantly discounted domestic and international air travel.
They can get up to five days off in a fortnight due to a user-friendly shift roster.They get to swap shifts with other workers to extend this time off.
They get five weeks' annual leave, generous sick leave conditions and a well managed andflexible superannuation fund.

 

[Daggs01]

And they want more!
I would now move Qantas baggage handlers above Investment Bankers as the number one job where you can bung on extra fees for not really doing any extra work.

- btw nothing against Investment Bankers, just For the Lolz.

 

[LiamR]

On the face of it, they have some good demands, but their tactics make them seem like terrorists. The lowest of the low. You call a strike, you strike, you don’t pull out at the last minute and call another. I find myself almost hoping that if they’re allowed to do stuff like that, Qantas could do something just as bad (not sure what), and point to what they did first as a reason to get away with it.

Sam, I completely agree with you here. While they may or may not have some valid demands. The way they are acting at the moment is completely unprofessional, but it's immature and quite frankly, low.

For starters, why on earth would a union leader advise the public not to fly Qantas, the very company that employees all the members of his union?

By all the statistics I have seen, Qantas staff are amongst the best treated in the industry, and the unions are just living in the past, unwilling to realise that we are no longer living in the days where it cost $600 for return trip to Sydney. Aircraft are newer, and airlines overall are becoming more efficient. The unions are just living in the past.

When I see the Unions call a strike, and then call it off hours before it's due to start I completely loose all respect for the unions.

When I heard the Unions say the reason for cancelling the strike was that Qantas threatened to not pay them. I face palmed myself. Is that a joke? Do you expect Qantas to pay you for going on strike?

The unions know that if they cancel the strike at the last moment, they can't restore the airline. Planes have already been made and they cannot be changed.

This puts Qantas in an awkward position, because, I don't believe they should be paid for turning up to work when they claimed they were striking. But, if Qantas didn't, it would be a PR nightmare. Being a good employer they pay their employees, while having a heavily disrupted network.

This is just pure greed. The engineers get paid for work they said they weren't going to do, while the passengers are disrupted, and Qantas is financially damaged.

This is completely appalling behaviour from the Unions, and I fully support Qantas.

I feel for Alan Joyce, who has been working very hard to sort out all these shenanigans, only to receive cowardly death threats.

 

[medhead]

You don't have an "I don't agree with either side option".

 

[medhead]

There was an interesting letter in The Australian yesterday. It detailed wages and conditions for baggage handlers.
If we assume the figures are correct, the package seems generous. I think it also illustrates that some Qantas employees are on old style generous packages, and are failing to realise we are in a different world now.

Handlers get paid upwards of 20 per cent above the industry rate and earnbetween $70,000 to $85,000 a year including penalty rates but not overtime.Overtime is paid at double time as are any public holidays and if they happen tobe rostered off on a public holiday they get a day off in lieu later on.
If they get called in to work by choice when rostered off, regardless of the time spent at work, they get paid a minimum four hours at double time.
There are a multitude of miscellaneous penalty rates paid as well. In addition to all this, Qantas baggage handlers get significantly discounted domestic and international air travel.
They can get up to five days off in a fortnight due to a user-friendly shift roster.They get to swap shifts with other workers to extend this time off.
They get five weeks' annual leave, generous sick leave conditions and a well managed andflexible superannuation fund.

Yeah, I read that. Without disagreeing with the general message there were a couple of dodgy things raised in the letter. The 4 hour minimum applies to everyone, except school kids working after school. Basically no one can be rostered for a shift less than 4 hours. Then there is the significant discount on flights. Plenty of people have posted here about staff travel basically not being worth the effort. I also had a problem with the 5 days off per fortnight and being able to swap shifts. I get 6 days off a fortnight! and I don't have to work shifts. Then swapping shifts what's wrong with that? How is that a massive benefit that most other shift workers don't enjoy?

 

[munitalP]

You don't have an "I don't agree with either side option".

Yes I do - it's called the "don't vote" button

 

[medhead]

Yes I do - it's called the "don't vote" button

Lucky I didn't vote then.

 

[serfty]

Lucky I didn't vote then.

Nor me!!

 

[simongr]

By locking out workers AJ can bring this all down on top of him and board, a lock out can trigger compulsory arbitration which could come down on the side of the Unions.

We've all complained here about AJ degrading QF for us as passengers, now the Unions are complaining of the same thing (by way of other means) for a section of employees we are all taking the moral high ground.:shock:

Matt

Actually I have complained about the service delivered by the staff and not the CEO.

 

[Daggs01]

I don't believe this is the fault of the board or AJ, unions need to do something in order to justify staff paying union fees.

Unions are just like the movie Inception, serve only to put in your mind if you pay them, they will get you more money.


- Darren Allatt

Sent from my iPhone using AustFreqFly app

 

[browski]

I don't believe this is the fault of the board or AJ, unions need to do something in order to justify staff paying union fees.

Unions are just like the movie Inception, serve only to put in your mind if you pay them, they will get you more money.

Well whatever the unions are doing, I want some of it. The salaries of those workers are pretty impressive (not as impressive as AJ's salary though - his union rep must be a cracker)

 

[NM]

Handlers get paid upwards of 20 per cent above the industry rate and earnbetween $70,000 to $85,000 a year including penalty rates but not overtime.Overtime is paid at double time as are any public holidays and if they happen tobe rostered off on a public holiday they get a day off in lieu later on.
If they get called in to work by choice when rostered off, regardless of the time spent at work, they get paid a minimum four hours at double time.
There are a multitude of miscellaneous penalty rates paid as well. In addition to all this, Qantas baggage handlers get significantly discounted domestic and international air travel.
They can get up to five days off in a fortnight due to a user-friendly shift roster.They get to swap shifts with other workers to extend this time off.
They get five weeks' annual leave, generous sick leave conditions and a well managed andflexible superannuation fund.

Perhaps I am niaive, perhaps I am ignorant, but in my simplistic view of life I would expect the biggest issue for baggage handlers job security should be to ensure their company is the one where their customer-base chooses to spend their money. Disrupting the travel plans of the people go provide the cash that pays the wages seems little short-sighted for people like baggage handlers. Its not like Qantas has the option to send those baggage handler jobs off-shore to a low-cost country :!:.

Again, this is my simplistic view. The way to ensure job security as a baggage handler is to ensure your employer has a growing custimer base and that those customers (passengers) choose to check bags. The way to do that is to get the bags delivered at the destination very efficiently and undamaged. Do that concistently and the roll of baggage handlers at your employer is assured.

I understand this may not apply to engineers or pilots. But surely baggage handlers jobs are safe as long as the airline is financially sound. Its not like the jobs can be outsourced to The Philippines, Malaysia, China, India, New Zealand, or Timbuktu. But they could potentially be outsourced to an external provider who may not offer such generous conditions - perhaps its time to invest in ACME Baggage Handlers Australia?

 

[browski]

NM, a baggage handler can be sacked at anytime and replaced by a jetstar contracted handler (obviously at lower wages). So that is why job security is the main issue.

 

[VHOEJ]

Joyce's payrise (as well as the other execs pay) is the unions only arguement. It is not a good look I agree and they probably should not accept the rises but really, that is the unions only argument.

And calling off strikes - it is genius. Think about it - annoy all the passengers, then call it off (to make you look good), but then go to work and do nothing because all the flights are cancelled. So they get paid for doing less work........it is win win for them.

Unions just want,want,want - they are criticising the business. They have never run an airline - they have to make the hard decisions. If unions had any ideas they think would work better to fix the current mess, they would get a lot further.

 

[simongr]

NM, a baggage handler can be sacked at anytime and replaced by a jetstar contracted handler (obviously at lower wages). So that is why job security is the main issue.

Really? Do QF not have to comply with unfair dismissal laws? That must make their life so much easier.

Sarcasm aside is there any other job in australia that can't be outsourced? I know mine can and I know professionals that try to convince me that my team can be outsourced. The only reason that they haven't been outsourced is that they do a great job at a fair wage and costs are less than outsourcing.

 

[Meggsy]

Sarcasm aside is there any other job in australia that can't be outsourced? I know mine can and I know professionals that try to convince me that my team can be outsourced. The only reason that they haven't been outsourced is that they do a great job at a fair wage and costs are less than outsourcing.

Exactly right. Many Qantas ground staff have lost their jobs at regional ports in recent times because it was cheaper to outsource to companies like Aviation Ground Handling, Aerocare, etc. No one has the right to guaranteed employment. If you can't adapt as the world changes you will cease to exist. Way too many examples of companies folding due to archaic work place practices making them uncompetitive. Surely blind freddy can see this is the case with much of Qantas also.

 

[Moopere]

Goodness me - the tail trying to wag the dog. On those few occasions where this is allowed to happen it inevitably ends in canine death.

Heres an idea. 35,000 employees right? Why not each invest $10,000 in QF stock, with voting rights? $350M won't buy you the company but it will sure as hell get you a vote. In fact, why not create a QF workers collective company entity, put the 350M$ in that and get a place on the board as well? Want a pay rise? Force it through as a voting owners body.

A dream? Perhaps, but, I suspect owning a business, wanting to keep it solvent _and_ obtain some sort of decent return on captial investment would change many peoples point of view pretty quickly.

 

[samiam]

Perhaps I am niaive, perhaps I am ignorant, but in my simplistic view of life I would expect the biggest issue for baggage handlers job security should be to ensure their company is the one where their customer-base chooses to spend their money.

No more naive or ignorant than the baggage handlers themselves, who are people- like you and I- who are caught up in this mess.

The question I would ask instead is "what is the biggest issue for the union" and how are they putting this to the baggage handlers, in order to further the union agenda?

Unfortunately, in my opinion, many unions have become self-interested and are often running much broader agendas than simply the interests of workers- if there's convergence of the two, well all the better.

They don't always necessarily put the complete picture to their members.

The workers who are represented by the union can choose to agree or disagree with the union's stand- but where would that leave dissenters, amongst their peers? Scabs anyone?

I don't for a minute believe that a collective of workers created a log of claims or directly put to the union that protected industrial action, of the scope displayed, should occur- in my opinion, the union presented advice to the workers on this matter and blind faith dictated that the 'experienced union who we, the members, are paying through our union fees knows best'- and so it was supported through secret ballot.

Sure, the members can disagree and push back at the union- anyone willing to guess how easy that would be?

The only winners here are the union- until they miscalculate their support- not just from the public or government, but their own members.

Above is my opinion - different industry, but recent experience with unions, eba's and FWA.

 

[Moopere]

Way too many examples of companies folding due to archaic work place practices making them uncompetitive. Surely blind freddy can see this is the case with much of Qantas also.

Indeed.

What was the dividend payout last year? And what was that, percentage wise, as a return on capital?