Melbourne Wednesday 8 March Refuelers' strike

[jb747]

A fuel mule : https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/q...nt-on-planned-industrial-action-in-melbourne/

Interesting. Historically you couldn't just defuel from one aircraft another, as there were QC issues. And it's not as if there's a shortage of fuel in Melbourne. I'd have thought you'd need the same people to defuel an aircraft as you use to fuel it. Tankering generally refers to an aircrart carrying extra fuel that will ultimately be used by that aircraft, not playing KC-10 with it.

 

[justinbrett]

Interesting. Historically you couldn't just defuel from one aircraft another, as there were QC issues. And it's not as if there's a shortage of fuel in Melbourne. I'd have thought you'd need the same people to defuel an aircraft as you use to fuel it. Tankering generally refers to an aircrart carrying extra fuel that will ultimately be used by that aircraft, not playing KC-10 with it.

Exactly my thoughts. As I said, I've seen the RAAF do it but usually if there's an issue with fuel supply (or operating from a bare base with no supply). It's pre-planned and takes more people than just operating a hydrant or a truck.

 

[Quickstatus]

Historically you couldn't just defuel from one aircraft another, as there were QC issues

Would they have to defuel into a tanker then pump to another aircraft?
Even if the A380 could do a aircraft to aircraft transfer, where would they do it?. It’s a lot larger than a ground tanker and the hoses required would be very long.

 

[Quickstatus]

There is already a thread in the QF forum to discuss impacts on QF specifically (No QF Flights MEL-SYD for Sale 8 March 2023).

A quick perusal would indicate that @Melburnian1 started this thread 2 hrs prior to the other one.

 

[justinbrett]

A quick perusal would indicate that @Melburnian1 started this thread 2 hrs prior to the other one.

In the wrong forum - that was my point. If it's going to go in the QF forum, it has to be about the specific QF issues.

Posting the generic topic in the QF forum indicates he thinks the issue belongs to QF.

 

[Quickstatus]

SYDcentric QFi is

As borne out by BITRE international traffic out of AUS

 

[RooFlyer]

A quick perusal would indicate that @Melburnian1 started this thread 2 hrs prior to the other one.

A bit over 12 hours actually.

Some simply don't want any problems of Qantas to be prominent. Concatenate into fewer threads.

Qantas is 60% of the business. A number of others including freighters. Maybe 7% each? I dunno, but small compared to Qantas. Seems mostly a Qantas problem to me.

 

[Quickstatus]

In the wrong forum - that was my point

The current discussion seems to be heavy with QF centric statements so it appears to be in the right place. This thread heading is airline agnostic and the topic is refuelers strike and ironically the other one mentions QF and directly deals about non ticket sales and only indirectly relates to the same cause
I’ve also have not seen statements from other airlines.

 

[Quickstatus]

over 12 hours actually.

Thanks - yes. This one started Monday 0822hrs and the other at Monday 2226hrs

 

[justinbrett]

The current discussion seems to be heavy with QF centric statements so it appears to be in the right place.

Yes, the mods moved it to the Travel News forum.

 

[Quickstatus]

Travel News forum.

Which fits the Thread heading. But it does not mean that contributors should not mention QF especially when QF has made public statemtns about this issue. In fact as the major domestic incumbent, the effects of the strike are perhaps more substantial for QF.

As an aside, which airports in Australia have underground fuel delivery to the stands?.
Is WSI panning for underground fuel delivery or will rely on tankers

 

[justinbrett]

Which fits the Thread heading. But it does not mean that contributors should not mention QF especially when QF has made public statemtns about this issue. In fact as the major domestic incumbent, the effects of the strike are perhaps more substantial for QF.

As an aside, which airports in Australia have underground fuel delivery to the stands?.
Is WSI panning for underground fuel delivery or will rely on tankers

Yes. My point was (and maybe you missed it), OP created this thread in the QF forum. It was reported to mods to be moved, and it was.

Nobody said not to talk about QF. But many are equating "60% of the business" with "60% of the impact". As JB said most domestic flights won't be affected as they'll carry extra fuel to operate the onward flight. It's the international - particularly wide body flights most at risk. Of them that use Rivet, even just QR and SQ have more of those flights than QF today (and there's other airlines too). QF has also secured alternate suppliers.

In any case, it's now afternoon - things seem to be going pretty smoothly, no mass cancellations - a couple yes, but VA too - both could be unrelated to the strike. Still some hours left in the day so we shall see.

 

[Mwenenzi]

Channel 9 news quoted Transport Workers Union as stating:
"As Rivet's major client, accounting for at least 60 per cent of the work, Qantas has the ability and responsibility to dictate through its contracts with labour providers that workers refuelling its planes are receiving fair pay and safe working conditions..."

Earlier, the News Ltd online site stated:
"...While Qantas accounts for roughly 60 per cent of Rivet‘s refuelling work the company also services freight carrier DHL as well as international airlines Singapore Airlines, Qatar Airways, and Cathay Pacific..."

From the QF newsroom link

Qantas has a contract with ExxonMobil to provide fuel for flights at Melbourne Airport. ExxonMobil subcontracts the refuelling of aircraft to Rivet. Qantas does not have a direct relationship with Rivet.

Believe the union if you want.
Having written (construction) contracts for decades are limits what you ask for. You cannot dictate how other business's are operated. Only an expectation operations are within the law: nothing more - nothing less.

 

[milehighclub]

In any case, it's now afternoon - things seem to be going pretty smoothly, no mass cancellations - a couple yes, but VA too - both could be unrelated to the strike. Still some hours left in the day so we shall see.

For the rest of the afternoon there are currently 4 cancellations ex MEL so the impact has been minimal, if not almost normal - I've seen normal days much worse.

 

[justinbrett]

For the rest of the afternoon there are currently 4 cancellations ex MEL so the impact has been minimal, if not almost normal - I've seen normal days much worse.

Exactly my point, thanks. Some will try to assume that any QF cancellation out of MEL today is due fuel.

 

[Melburnian1]

For the rest of the afternoon there are currently 4 cancellations ex MEL so the impact has been minimal, if not almost normal - I've seen normal days much worse.

Benign weather assists today in creating favourable operating conditions. The most adverse capital city summary BOM suggests is 'possible storm in Darwin'. It is only a minor airport if flight numbers are the metric.

QF765, the 0735 hours morning MEL-PER diverted to ADL so that may well have been for extra fuel. The refuellers went on strike from 0400 AEDT.

So far today ex MEL (bearing in mind that this will often mean another flight is cancelled in the other direction), QFd cancellations have been or will be:

QF410 0700 hours to SYD
QF2087 0815 hours to BWT
QF677 1015 hours to ADL
QF771 1325 hours to PER
QF626 1550 hours to BNE
QF462 1600 hours to SYD
QF476 1745 hours to SYD

while QF11 to LAX, the scheduled 1120 hours did not become airborne until 1424 hours early to mid afternoon.

Earlier, QF151 (0900 hours MEL-AKL) didn't become airborne until 1051 mid morning.

QF779, the 1610 hours afternoon offering MEL-PER is predicted to depart at 1700 hours, presumably due to refuelling delays.

After Saturday (when no large scale sporting events or concerts are on) and perhaps equally with a typical non-school holidays Tuesday, Wednesday must be relatively quiet for passengers compared to a typical Monday morning or Friday/Sunday afternoon.

 

[justinbrett]

Benign weather assists today in creating favourable operating conditions. The most adverse capital city summary BOM suggests is 'possible storm in Darwin'. It is only a minor airport if flight numbers are the metric.

QF765, the 0735 hours morning MEL-PER diverted to ADL so that may well have been for extra fuel. The refuellers went on strike from 0400 AEDT.

So far today ex MEL (bearing in mind that this will often mean another flight is cancelled in the other direction), QFd cancellations have been or will be:

QF410 0700 hours to SYD
QF2087 0815 hours to BWT
QF677 1015 hours to ADL
QF771 1325 hours to PER
QF626 1550 hours to BNE
QF462 1600 hours to SYD
QF476 1745 hours to SYD

while QF11 to LAX, the scheduled 1120 hours did not become airborne until 1424 hours early to mid afternoon.

Earlier, QF151 (0900 hours MEL-AKL) didn't become airborne until 1051 mid morning.

QF779, the 1610 hours afternoon offering MEL-PER is predicted to depart at 1700 hours, presumably due to refuelling delays.

After Saturday (when no large scale sporting events or concerts are on) and perhaps equally with a typical non-school holidays Tuesday, Wednesday must be relatively quiet for passengers compared to a typical Monday morning or Friday/Sunday afternoon.

Well the ABC have declared it a fizzer.

Qantas has said the cancellations were not due to the fuel issue.

Refuelling staff walk off the job at Melbourne airport

Major travel disruption appears to have been avoided despite the industrial action.

www.abc.net.au

And it's certainly not the strike having the most impact today:

Live: Passengers stranded, police block station entrances as meltdown strikes Sydney's entire train network

Sydney Trains entire network is experiencing delays, after a communications issue struck shortly before the afternoon peak. Follow live

www.abc.net.au

 

[Melburnian1]

QF455, the 1500 hours SYD-MEL (A332 VH-EBA, a widebody) is 98 minutes late with its expected gate time into MEL becoming 1813 hours. Not normal.

 

[RooFlyer]

Having written (construction) contracts for decades are limits what you ask for. You cannot dictate how other business's are operated. Only an expectation operations are within the law: nothing more - nothing less.

I couldn't question your expertise on construction contracts, but I would query the bit about how other businesses are operated. I don't mean 'dictating' to them, but if I contract your company, and you subcontract to another company to provide the services to me (and I have been in this type of situation, many times, in the mining industry) then I would, and did:

* Put in our contract minimum performance hurdles and outcomes, with penalties if they are not met, and

* Put in that these hurdles apply to any subcontractor etc etc etc or else 'you' would make good to me

* And I'd add, or try to add, that any subcontractor must be approved by me (ie I wouldn't accept Dodgy Co as a subbie).

* Usual exclusions for Force Majeure

So it was Rivet's workers who struck? Would that be Force Majeure for the airlines and ExxonMobile?

Lucky the local union doesn't do strikes the French way .... No notice, just walk off the job. I'm sure many here have experienced this at CDG etc.

 

[Melburnian1]

Lucky the local union doesn't do strikes the French way .... No notice, just walk off the job. I'm sure many here have experienced this at CDG etc.

Today's action was 'protected industrial action'. Perhaps a concept the French don't know.