Engineer Strike

[gumpy]

Qantas engineers to strike this week

Man this would annoy me if it affected me

 

[oz_mark]

Qantas engineers to strike this week

Man this would annoy me if it affected me

Apparently there is a stop-work on Friday morning, 8-9 am.

 

[casanovawa]

Yes, be a real PITA...

Hopefully everyone at JQ and QF turn up for work on the 19-21 May and 7-8 August for my travel plans...

 

[thewinchester]

Qantas engineers to strike this week

Man this would annoy me if it affected me

Let's get some facts on the board first:

1. It has been arranged by Steve Purvinas and the crowd at the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association.
2. QF felt this was becomming a real possability on 6 MAY 2011 when they took the issue back to the Fair Work Australia tribunal.
3. It'll last one hour, and
4. is a protected industrial action.

At best this is a stop-work meeting. A strike implies a long term multi-day action, it's not the right one to use.

The likelihood of impact on operations is minimal, given the short length of the meeting and that Qantas are already informing they have plans in place to respond to any problems arising to ensure disriptions are minimised.

I would further suggest that this is just another tactic from Purvinas and his crowd to draw the process out as long as possible, until they finally get their way. This is highlighted by the fact the union in question recently instructed its members "not be available for MRTT conversion and B1 fundamental training until an outcome to payment negotiations for those courses had progressed."

According to QF, ALAEA's statement of claims is as follows:

* Wage claim and structural changes equates to between 5-6 per cent increase each year for 3 years;
* Abolition of current pay structure which rewards engineers' training and skill level to be replaced by a new pay structure which rewards engineers exclusively for the number of years they have worked for Qantas. This would automatically increase earnings by 2 per cent each year
* 6 weeks annual leave;
* Guaranteed staff travel (above generous existing travel benefits offered to staff) which would displace paying passengers; and
* Requirement for Qantas to commit to major engineering projects years out from when these decisions need to be made.

If the statement of claims, as published by QF, is correct - this union needs to remove its head from its backside. The claim is not only a return to the dark days of industrial relations, but rewards people for service and not actual outcomes and qualifications.

Further, if as published, they are seeking staff benefits over and above those offered to existing employees of the airline, they are really being silly. I'd love to see their justification as to why they deserve travel privledges over and above that of everyone else with the carrier.

 

[simongr]

Let's get some more facts on board as well.

- if this action has any impact on a passenger leading to a delay today, tomorrow or in the future the pax have the right to be annoyed at the union for doing this

Just because they have the right to do this does not make it the right thing to do.

 

[thewinchester]

Let's get some more facts on board as well.

- if this action has any impact on a passenger leading to a delay today, tomorrow or in the future the pax have the right to be annoyed at the union for doing this

Just because they have the right to do this does not make it the right thing to do.

I was just updating my post as you posted, and couldn't agree more.

QF needs to hang these guys out to dry, not only for their actions, but their statement of claims - which frankly is a joke, out of kilter with community standards, and tries to put these guys on a pedastool.

Engineers are just one of the many cogs that an airline needs to run. Without pilots or stewardesses, the planes can't legally fly. Without ground staff and catering, planes don't have bags, food and clean cabins. Without check-in staff, planes don't have customers... and so on.

They really need to wake up to these facts, and be more reasonable in what they are asking for.

 

[TheInsider]

They really need to wake up to these facts, and be more reasonable in what they are asking for.

I really don't think job security is an unreasonable request. Ground staff have received (based on NGCI) it based on the new EBA to be voted for in a few days time.

 

[TheInsider]

Also just received an email from the CFO sent to all QF group staff.

This afternoon the union leadership of the Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association (ALAEA) declared its intention to take industrial action against our airline.

Qantas has been in negotiations with the ALAEA since last September with the aim of agreeing an enteprise bargain for our licenced engineers.
Negotiating in good faith, we’ve had more than 20 meetings with these union officials. With all other avenues exhausted, Qantas approached Fair Work Australia last week to facilitate a conciliation process.
Today, ALAEA union officials abruptly halted the conciliation process and announced formal industrial action against Qantas.

This is extremely disappointing but it is not surprising.

For months now the ALAEA leadership has been attacking Qantas, attempting to damage our brand and destroy our reputation.

This industrial action will not serve the interests of our licenced engineers. It will not change the outcome of the negotiations, and it actively threatens the job security of all Qantas employees.

We have been prepared all along to negotiate sensibly with the ALAEA representatives on the pay and conditions of our licenced engineers.

We need to work together to overcome the significant hurdles for Qantas. We continue to ask the ALAEA to reconsider its decision and return to the negotiating table as soon as possible. We will continue to do our best to protect Australia’s iconic airline and all our jobs.

Now our focus must be on our customers. We have some contingency plans in place and at this early stage we anticipate no adverse impact on our customers or our operations. However if these union leaders choose to take ongoing action, this will inevitably have a detrimental impact on our operations and revenue at a time of record high fuel prices, unprecedented competition and uncertain global conditions. As events unfold we will continue to care for our employees and our customers who loyally support our business, because that is the only way we can secure the future of Qantas.

 

[medhead]

Wow talk about one sided. How about another fact. 5% unemployment rate and diving (we are told)
As for the so called statement of claims, that links to a qantas media release! Simply put it is not something to accept at face value. The training? Ok to say to someone, go do this training oh but we're not going to tell you how you'll get paid (under an award that supposedly rewards skills)? Staff travel? How many times has a staff member got on AFF and said that staff travel mostly isn't worth bothering with? Oh but qantas calls it attractive.

Sorry but I don't think we can accept as facts a media release from one party in a dispute.

 

[TiredOldFlyer]

Perhaps the Engineers are overdemanding but if the the QANTAS Management
Team are treating them the same way they treat their Cabin Crew and their
PAX I am not surprised.

 

[simongr]

I really don't think job security is an unreasonable request. Ground staff have received (based on NGCI) it based on the new EBA to be voted for in a few days time.

I have no assurances of job security in my role in a field that is much smaller than aircraft engineers. I am not sure why anyone deserves job security.

Wow talk about one sided. How about another fact. 5% unemployment rate and diving (we are told)

So unemplyment is low and therefore an opportunity to hold a company to ransom?

Perhaps the Engineers are overdemanding but if the the QANTAS Management Team are treating them the same way they treat their Cabin Crew and their PAX I am not surprised.

Well many QF pax are unhappy here and they are moving their business to DJ/VA - what they arent doing is booking flights, getting on board and the asking to leave - which is pretty much what a strike is (noting this isnt a strike). What the engineers have done is intentionally disrupt passenger travel - not disrupt benefits and comfort - but INTENTIONALLY make the paying pax have discomfort to further their own aims.

Personally as soon as anyone strikes - I lose any sympathy for their cause and actively look for ways to work against them as they look for ways to work against me.

Out of interest have the engineers ever asked the pax what they think of the strikes and their actions other than with questions like:

"Do you support the right of engineers to strike and make sure your planes are safe?"

 

[herman_aussie]

Geez.... i dont even have a guaranteed payrise every year of 5-6%, and 6 weeks annual leave, and travel benefits....


don't these engineers realize that they can be replaced? or worse off... lose their job completely because of a couple union leaders .

 

[medhead]

I have no assurances of job security in my role in a field that is much smaller than aircraft engineers. I am not sure why anyone deserves job security.

We don't even know what job security means from the information that has been released. Job security doesn't have to mean a job for life. You do have a notice period in your contract, I'm sure. And you do have statutory redundancy payments. That represents a form of job security

So unemplyment is low and therefore an opportunity to hold a company to ransom?

The company is not being held to ransom any more than workers are held to ransom when unemployment is high. The reality is that there is a shortage of labour, in general, (not sure about aircraft engineers) and therefore it costs more. Do you get paid more because there is a shortage of people in your field? I know I do.

What the engineers have done is intentionally disrupt passenger travel - not disrupt benefits and comfort - but INTENTIONALLY make the paying pax have discomfort to further their own aims.

Personally as soon as anyone strikes - I lose any sympathy for their cause and actively look for ways to work against them as they look for ways to work against me.

That cuts both ways. The company has just as much power to stop the disruption by acting in good faith. Have they asked their customers if they want to be disrupted. As far as we know qantas might be taking a completely obstructionist role that has backed the workers into a corner. The fact that people are blaming the union based on a qantas media release explains why the company might take such an action. If qantas has taken this approach then it is perfectly reasonable for thee union to talk to the workers and discuss the situation.

I just think it is wrong to blame one side without knowing the whole story.

don't these engineers realize that they can be replaced?

Can they? Are there 1600 licensed engineers out there waiting for a job?

 

[simongr]

Can they? Are there 1600 licensed engineers out there waiting for a job?

There are plenty of overseas engineers

I appreciate your points regarding not knowing the whole story. I personally though do not believe that anyone has the right to withdraw labour without the employer having the right to then withdraw employment. This is a very personal belief and I appreciate that it is not consistent with the current employment legislation. If companies do not act in good faith and back their employees into a position where the employee chooses to strike then I think the company will suffer in the long term. I do not think that then should provide people with a right to strike though.

 

[ausi ski bum]

Wow flying 18th and 19th WW to SYD and SYD to LAX, hope I am not effected.

 

[UP4014]

Let's get some more facts on board as well.

- if this action has any impact on a passenger leading to a delay today, tomorrow or in the future the pax have the right to be annoyed at the union for doing this

Just because they have the right to do this does not make it the right thing to do.

Let's not forget QF management aren't know for their empathy when it comes to certain staff concerns. Always a good tactic to have a some sacrificial "claims" on the table.

This particular move of a 1 hour meeting, and this is just an opinion, will focus management because their monthly bonus calculation could be affected.

 

[medhead]

There are plenty of overseas engineers

I appreciate your points regarding not knowing the whole story. I personally though do not believe that anyone has the right to withdraw labour without the employer having the right to then withdraw employment. This is a very personal belief and I appreciate that it is not consistent with the current employment legislation. If companies do not act in good faith and back their employees into a position where the employee chooses to strike then I think the company will suffer in the long term. I do not think that then should provide people with a right to strike though.

As an observation they used to have this, it was called serfdom. Seriously, that gives the employer all the power. There needs to be a balance, where employees can negotiate on a level-ish playing field. Basically I don't believe that employers should have the ability to ignore workers in such situations and not have consequences. Certainly companies that do this will suffer in the longer term, along with their employees. Much better to bring it to a head quickly, IMO. But then I've had some bad experiences.

Anyway, obviously it is not a simple as I make out, so I'm not discounting your views.

 

[UP4014]

As an observation they used to have this, it was called serfdom. Seriously, that gives the employer all the power. There needs to be a balance, where employees can negotiate on a level-ish playing field. Basically I don't believe that employers should have the ability to ignore workers in such situations and not have consequences. Certainly companies that do this will suffer in the longer term, along with their employees. Much better to bring it to a head quickly, IMO. But then I've had some bad experiences.

Anyway, obviously it is not a simple as I make out, so I'm not discounting your views.

Yes, the rights we have today as workers have taken the last 120 years to get. Unions, like them or not, have benefited all workers even professionals over this time to make sure there are basic minimum standards and conditions.

 

[thewinchester]

Sorry but I don't think we can accept as facts a media release from one party in a dispute.

If you can find an alternative source, feel free to post it. I spent a good while trying to find it but came up blanks, hence my stating that 'if the statement of claims published by QF is accurate'.

 

[medhead]

If you can find an alternative source, feel free to post it. I spent a good while trying to find it but came up blanks, hence my stating that 'if the statement of claims published by QF is accurate'.

Yep, you said If, but the remarks based on that if were a lot more definite.

Can't offer alternative sources, but The Oz does at least quote the ALAEA president today as saying "if Qantas continue along its belligerent path". Certainly not enough for me to state that qantas needs to extract its head and be hung out to dry. All we have is 2 sides to a dispute pointing fingers at each other.