QANTAS is to close its Sydney maintenance base, shedding 480

[needaholiday]

Press release to the ASX from Qantas quoting Geoff Dixon

Qantas Airways said today it would close its B747 heavy maintenance operations in Sydney by May as part of a major review of all its aircraft engineering operations.

" A longer term commitment to retaining operations in Australia will depend on Qantas acheiving competitive benchmarks with the larger global maintenance Repair and Overhaul providers (MROS's) now dominating world aviation"

"Retaining three widebody maintenance facilities in Australia is no longer viable under this scenario. We have one chance to make this this workand we are determined to suceed"

Heavy maintenance for 747's will be transferred to Avalon

Heavy maintenence for 767's will continue in BNE.

A review over the next six monthsof the airlines narrow body aircraft heavy maintenance currently carried out at Tullarmarine

 

[oz_mark]

[duplicate] oops

 

[oz_mark]

Breaking story- will be interesting to see where they get the planes fixed...China?

According to a report from The Australian, the jobs are going to Avalon


See: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18400577%5E1702,00.html

480 jobs to go in Qantas closure
By staff reporters and AAP
March 09, 2006
QANTAS will cut 480 jobs in the closure of its heavy maintenance operations in Sydney.

The airline said today the B747 maintenance operations would close in May and the decision follows a review of all its aircraft engineering operations.

Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon said the review would initially mean Qantas invested in, and retained, its wide-body heavy maintenance facilities in Australia.

"A longer term commitment to retaining the operations in Australia will depend on Qantas achieving competitive benchmarks with the larger global Maintenance Repair and Overhaul providers (MROs) now dominating world aviation.

"Retaining three wide-body maintenance facilities in Australia is no longer viable under this scenario. We have one chance to make this work and we are determined to succeed."









Mr Dixon said Qantas had to be competitive in every area in which it invested as the company moved towards a cost base that could ensure profitable operations with an oil price above $US60 a barrel.

He said the closure of the Sydney base would result in the loss of about 480 jobs.

"However, through re-deployment the number of people who leave the company as a result of this decision could reduce to around 340."

Mr Dixon said the review at Qantas Engineering would mean:


Heavy maintenance for Qantas' Boeing 747 fleet being transferred from Sydney to the airline's base in Avalon, Victoria, with an increase in employment opportunities at Avalon.
Heavy maintenance for the B767 fleet to continue at the airline's new purpose-built facility in Brisbane, also with increased employment opportunities.
A review in the next six months of the airline's narrow-body aircraft heavy maintenance operations, now out at Tullamarine in Melbourne.
An investment of about $50 million in infrastructure and technology to aid the restructuring.
Qantas Engineering seeking third-party work within the region when the restructuring was complete.
A commitment to retain a comprehensive apprentice program for the training of future aviation engineers in Australia.
Mr Dixon said the decision to close the airline's Sydney heavy maintenance base, after more than 55 years of operation, was regretted, but necessary.
"We have severe space limitations at Sydney and the limitations will increase in future years," he said

"Following this decision, we will still have more than 2900 people employed in engineering in Sydney as well as almost 18,000 Sydney-based staff in other departments.

"We would need to vacate by 2009, or 2010 at the latest, even if the Sydney base had provided the most efficient outcome for Qantas.

 

[bigjobs]

this seems to be somewhere between no change at all and sending the maintenance jobs off shore ...

reckon there will be industrial action? i think there will be ...

 

[NM]

I really don't see how the unions can complain about this one. The announced 747 heavy maintenance is staying in Australia, and this will result in expenading the already existing Avalon 747 maintenance base.

This seems like a very logical decision to me. Unfortunate for those who will lose jobs, but that's life. It happens in all industries.

 

[Sheriff]

Unfortunate for those who will lose jobs, but that's life.

A very arrogant and unsymapathetic remark considering many people who will lose their jobs probably have a big mortgage to pay and children to feed, that's life.

Sheriff

 

[Dave Noble]

Unfortunate for those who will lose jobs, but that's life.

A very arrogant and unsymapathetic remark considering many people who will lose their jobs probably have a big mortgage to pay and children to feed, that's life.

Sheriff

Why is it arrogant and unsympathetic. NM is quite correct; jobs moving is a fact of life; e.g. call centres moving overseas where they are cheaper to operate

Companies work, as legally required, for the best interests of their shareholders; that is a fact of life

It is unfortunate for those that end up unemployed, but the company is operating as it should; in these days, it is, imo, important to have insurance against losing jobs.

Dave

 

[oz_mark]

this seems to be somewhere between no change at all and sending the maintenance jobs off shore ...

reckon there will be industrial action? i think there will be ...

Given the stated need to restructure seems like a better option than just sending it offshore.

 

[oz_mark]

Qantas believes Games strike averted

From ninemsn

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=90539

Qantas believes a maintenance restructure which will cost at least 340 jobs has averted any threat of any industrial action in the lead-up to the Melbourne Commonwealth Games.

But the airline has refused to rule out moving jobs offshore in the future.

Qantas announced it would cut 480 jobs with the closure of the Sydney B747 maintenance operations in May, with the work to be shifted to its Victorian facilities rather than sending the operations overseas.

The airline has said staff redeployment could reduce the number of job losses to about 340 if workers transferred from Sydney.

Unions had been concerned Qantas would send 2,500 maintenance jobs offshore to China, and had threatened industrial action which could have affected the Commonwealth Games in Melbourne starting next week.

Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon met union leaders and later told reporters he could not predict whether there would now be union action, but said he did not anticipate any.

He described the tone of the meetings as "very co-operative and very sensible".

 

[NM]

A very arrogant and unsymapathetic remark considering many people who will lose their jobs probably have a big mortgage to pay and children to feed, that's life.

Sheriff

I fail to see how my comment was "very arrogant and unsympathetic". I think it was pragmatic and realistic. As I said, it is unfortunate for those that will love their jobs. And I really would not like to see the alternate option of operating inefficiently and having the situation where even more people lose their jobs because the airline goes the same was as another famous Aussie icon airline.

 

[aus_flyer]

A very arrogant and unsymapathetic remark considering many people who will lose their jobs probably have a big mortgage to pay and children to feed, that's life.

Sheriff

I fail to see how my comment was "very arrogant and unsympathetic". I think it was pragmatic and realistic. As I said, it is unfortunate for those that will love their jobs. And I really would not like to see the alternate option of operating inefficiently and having the situation where even more people lose their jobs because the airline goes the same was as another famous Aussie icon airline.

I agree with NM entirely.

(I do, however, believe that if jobs were to move offshore, then the government should not protect Qantas on the Aus-US route)

 

[oz_mark]

(I do, however, believe that if jobs were to move offshore, then the government should not protect Qantas on the Aus-US route)

This is exactly in line with my thinking. Had they gone the offshore route, then the protection on that route should have come straight off.

 

[needaholiday]

Out of interest, where do DJ service their 737NG fleet, isn't it NZ? (heavy maintenance)

 

[NM]

Out of interest, where do DJ service their 737NG fleet, isn't it NZ? (heavy maintenance)

Melbourne and Brisbane for line maintenance, Air NZ for heavy maintenance.

 

[shillard]

Unfortunate for those who will lose jobs, but that's life.

A very arrogant and unsymapathetic remark considering many people who will lose their jobs probably have a big mortgage to pay and children to feed, that's life.

Sheriff

1. They chose to take on the big mortgage.

2. They (like all workers) had the facility of income insurance available.

3. They will likely get buku redundancy payouts and/ or the opportunity to relocate to the new facility.

4. It is neither arrogant nor unsympathetic - it is an objective observation.

5. It IS life - companies change, jobs move, jobs cease to exist. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. Remember, the medication only works if you take it EVERY day....

 

[one9]

A very arrogant and unsymapathetic remark considering many people who will lose their jobs probably have a big mortgage to pay and children to feed, that's life.

Sheriff

Think where we would all be if the likes of Sheriff had got Mark Latham elected last elections.

 

[QF WP]

Knowing NM as well as I do, I know that his comment was as he stated "pragmatic and realistic". Others similarly found his comment in the same vein.

You found it an "very arrogant and unsymapathetic remark" Sheriff. That's your perogative and you're entitled to it.

Nonetheless, the facts (accord to QF's Geoff Dixon) is that the facility was bound to close in 2009, 2010 at the latest. So the workers who aren't able to be redeployed will be offered redundancies...that's fair. QF pays out a lot of money now in the hope that their calculations are correct that they will save alot of money in the long term...

Redundancy payments are also very tax effective, being that of the amount they receive, $6,491 plus $3,246 for each completed year of service (2005/06 FY rules) is tax free. Generally, the formula agreed to by the unions and QF (or in their EPA's or CAs) for the quantum of the redundancy payments for workers will be something like 4 week's pay plus 2 weeks for every completed year of service.

 

[NM]

A couple more media reports on this topic:

Qantas job losses regrettable: PM

THE shedding of up to 480 jobs by Qantas is regrettable but at least the work is staying in Australia, Prime Minister John Howard said.

Qantas announced yesterday it was closing its heavy maintenance operations in Sydney and was moving them to Avalon airport outside Melbourne.

MacBank shops workers

UP TO 480 Qantas workers will be sacked because Macquarie Bank would rather turn spare Sydney Airport land into a retail factory outlet.

The Daily Telegraph has learned the real reason the Qantas's (qan.ASX:Quote,News) heavy-maintenance work is being shifted interstate is because an airport draft master plan, released last November, did not set aside enough room for the operations.

Instead, Macquarie-backed (mbl.ASX:Quote,News) airport operators are determined to create extra retail space at the city's major aviation hub.

 

[bambbbam2]

Yes it is a sad fact about the jobs. Think of all those out-of-work blacksmiths after the horeseless carriage was invented!

But it has been an accepted economic fact since Adam Smith that 'money will flow to where it gets the best return'

There is a lesson in this for all of us - make sure you look after your own career, skills and education - because no-one else will.

 

[Sheriff]

NM,
I apoligise if my post has offended you, that was not my intention. I am entitled to express my views regarding your comments, whether you agree with them or not. From reading many of your posts (haven’t got enough time to read all of them), you sound like a morally responsible individual. So I would have thought you would have expressed your sadness and disappointment at the prospect of many hard working Australian maintenance workers losing their jobs. Many of whom have worked tirelessly for Qantas for many years maintaining aircrafts to ensure safety requirements are meet so Qantas’s excellent safety record is maintained. The fact is that many of theses maintenance workers are on the minimum award wage, have families with children to support that heavily depend on the income derived from this employment to pay for mortgages and other family commitments. Many of these retrenched workers will find it difficult to find another job, many will not even find another job, and many will receive small redundancy packages not even worth mentioning, that’s life. I sincerely thought your comment was inappropriate and harsh considering the circumstances these Australians are now faced with, even if it is the reality.

Regards
Sheriff