Qantas Sale Amendment (Still Call Australia Home) Bill 2011

[medhead]

First off workcover in NSW does cover travel home from work. Does NSW legislation apply to flight crew? As for fatigue on the way home; assuming that the accident was fatigue related, massive assumption, if they were that fatigued driving home then I would question their fatigue level at work as well. Were they fit for work in the first place.

As for jetstar support, regardless of legal obligations any good employer would be supportive of their staff. That's how you get good, loyal employees.


Sent from my iPhone using Aust Freq Fly app so please excuse the lack of links.

 

[Mal]

First off workcover in NSW does cover travel home from work. Does NSW legislation apply to flight crew?

Assuming it does: (From NSW WorkCover)

A worker may be able to make a claim for injuries suffered in the course of most journeys (without significant interruption or diversion) to and from the worker’s:
home (place of abode) and place of employment

Hence, why I said *could* trigger this issue. But we don't know the full story.

As for fatigue on the way home; assuming that the accident was fatigue related, massive assumption, if they were that fatigued driving home then I would question their fatigue level at work as well. Were they fit for work in the first place.

That's for CASA to decide - not me or you. It's always a big risk to jump straight in a car and drive when arriving off a long distance international flight, certainly something I am always wary of.

As for jetstar support, regardless of legal obligations any good employer would be supportive of their staff. That's how you get good, loyal employees.

And we don't know what was offered, and what wasn't offered by them.

 

[thewinchester]

Joyce seems to be defending the decision to purchase A380s over the 777s. I'm fairly sure he said the original model could not fly to LA but the 777ER could. However, by that time, QF had committed to the A380s.

"Today we have this order of A380s that precedes the cost of the 777s . . . The A380 is the clear winner." Lots of defence of aircraft choice, including the 787.

The 777 question was also comprehensibly rebutted and responded to at the AGM. If I had some time, I'd dig up the exact comment from the AGM vide.

Not all maintenance done offshore is third world. It would make sense dollars wise to have Lufthansa Technik do the maintenance of A380's in Germany as opposed to setting up a fully fledged A380 maintenance base in Oz for a handful of A380's.

Having aircraft maintenance done in China is a whole different ball game.

If he has been a director of New Star Holdings since 2009 it would be reasonable to assume that he has access to the salaries paid by Valuair & Jetstar Asia.

Heavy maintenance in SE Asia: Singapore is also a good location with for heavy maintenance and I believe that ST Aerospace does this for A300, A310, A320, A330, A340, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777. Hong Kong also has some big name heavy maintenance shops from memory.

Heavy Maintenance in China: I dismiss that characterisation out of hand. One example of this is Ameco Beijing, which is a JV between Air China and Lufthansa and has been operating since 1989. And if Lufthansa can trust their heavy maintenance to be done there, then why the heck wouldn't QF.

New Star Holdings: Sadly, I don't have access to any databases to get info on this company, and ProQuest Asia isn't being very helpful. Google yields even less information. If anyone has access to the Global DUNS Database or similar, would be wise to search there.

 

[oz_mark]

New Star Holdings: Sadly, I don't have access to any databases to get info on this company, and ProQuest Asia isn't being very helpful. Google yields even less information. If anyone has access to the Global DUNS Database or similar, would be wise to search there.

One only has to go to the Jetstar site to discover Bruce Buchanan is a director of Newstar (no space in the name):

Mr Buchanan has a Civil Engineering Degree from The University of New South Wales, and a Master of Business Administration from The Australian Graduate School of Management and the Anderson School at UCLA. He is a director of Newstar Investment Holdings Pte Ltd, Jetstar Pacific Airlines Aviation Joint Stock Company and Jetstar Holidays Co Ltd.

Executive bios

 

[ozbeachbabe]

The male witness claims that Asian-based crew are paid SGD55 allowance per overnight stay in Australia, whereas he (Australian-based) get AUD100.

Also the overseas crews have to share hotel rooms whereas Australian crews have sole use of a hotel room.

The male witness has described doing a DPS return (presumedly ex-SIN) over a Friday night, Saturday off, called in Sunday, then a HNL on Monday. He added that under his agreement, even if he's sick for just one day, he's required to provide a doctor's certificate or stat dec - but the decs aren't accepted. The female flight attendant is under an agreement whereby she has just four sick days a year that she does not need to provide any documentation for.

Many crew choose to drop a days pay & get some much needed sleep than try & get a Doctors certificate as you have to be on a health care card to be bulk billed in DRW never mind trying to get a Doctors appointment so it just wouldn't be worth in the long run.

The two JQ cabin crew giving evidence at the moment are painting a very damning picture of life with the orange star.

Sadly the crew are just telling it like it is.

Heavy Maintenance in China: I dismiss that characterisation out of hand. One example of this is Ameco Beijing, which is a JV between Air China and Lufthansa and has been operating since 1989. And if Lufthansa can trust their heavy maintenance to be done there, then why the heck wouldn't QF.

Bean counters at QF make the decisions so they wouldn't give a rats if LH trust Ameco to do maintenance or not. It's not a matter of trust it's a matter or whoever's cheapest gets the nod.

 

[medhead]

That's for CASA to decide - not me or you. It's always a big risk to jump straight in a car and drive when arriving off a long distance international flight, certainly something I am always wary of.

The big problem with fatigue is it is so subjective. At some workplaces that involve heavy equipment it is just enough for the worker to say they are not fit. That then takes up a sick day. Obviously this isn't going to work if the workplace doesn't have a well developed fitness for work culture or when using sick days is difficult, for example certificates needed for a one day absence.


Sent from my iPhone using Aust Freq Fly app so please excuse the lack of links.

 

[thewinchester]

Bean counters at QF make the decisions so they wouldn't give a rats if LH trust Ameco to do maintenance or not. It's not a matter of trust it's a matter or whoever's cheapest gets the nod.

Are you kidding me!

My response to you is simple: unless that maintenance facility the plane is maintained in is approved by CASA and is up to scratch, the plane doesn't fly - No ifs', ands' or buts'.

This is explained in detail within Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASR), specifically Part 145;

CASR Part 145: Continuing airworthiness — Part 145 approved maintenance organisations

This Part sets out matters pertaining to Part 145 approved maintenance organisations and maintenance personnel requiring authorisation for the performance of maintenance certifications and the issue of certificates of release to service for aircraft and aeronautical product maintenance.

Part 145 specifically exclaims:

Public air transport operations using large aircraft must have maintenance performed by a Part 145 approved organisation;

Further: Part 145 Manual of Standards - Comlaw

This stuff isn't a negotiable requirement, no matter how cheap or expensive the next C Check is.

Additionally, CASA Project SS 05/01 proposes to update Part 145 even further, to in part:

[Introduce] Specific provisions... for the approval of foreign maintenance organisations overseas for the maintenance of Australian aircraft and aeronautical products under the Australian regulations;

So you can sit there and exclaim cheapest, and you're right to a point - but regardless how how much they charge, the work is still performed to the same exacting standards there as it is back home.

And really, do you think an airline executive is going to get someone to do maintenance just because it'll save them a couple of bucks here and there? I think not. The issue of risk management has been covered here extensively, and any good manager knows that a failure up front leads to bigger costs down the road. Air Crash Investigations anyone?

 

[Mal]

The big problem with fatigue is it is so subjective. At some workplaces that involve heavy equipment it is just enough for the worker to say they are not fit. That then takes up a sick day. Obviously this isn't going to work if the workplace doesn't have a well developed fitness for work culture or when using sick days is difficult, for example certificates needed for a one day absence.

Bit more reported on Yahoo News: Jetstar staff forced to clean around dead body - Yahoo!7

last-minute witness, Sydney-based Jetstar flight attendant Michael Kelly, took the hearing in a different direction.

Mr Kelly testified he and several of his colleagues had been falling asleep on 15-and-a-half-hour return trips between Sydney and Bali.

He highlighted the case of a woman who crashed her car on the way home from one such flight and later committed suicide.

"Because she stopped for coffee to stay awake she didn't receive any assistance from the company because she broke the journey from point A to point B," he said.

 

[medhead]

Thanks Mal


Sent from my iPhone using Aust Freq Fly app so please excuse the lack of links.

 

[amaroo]

last-minute witness, Sydney-based Jetstar flight attendant Michael Kelly, took the hearing in a different direction.

Mr Kelly testified he and several of his colleagues had been falling asleep on 15-and-a-half-hour return trips between Sydney and Bali.

He highlighted the case of a woman who crashed her car on the way home from one such flight and later committed suicide.

"Because she stopped for coffee to stay awake she didn't receive any assistance from the company because she broke the journey from point A to point B," he said.

That's disgraceful - they need to hang their heads in shame.

This is an example where unions are a force for good & deserve credit for standing up for their rights.

 

[amaroo]

Having aircraft maintenance done in China is a whole different ball game.

Seems Boeing don't have any concerns setting up factories & assisting local firms produce parts for their planes.

Boeing, Avic To Optimize Parts Production In China | AVIATION WEEK


Things can be built & serviced anywhere in the world......systems control the process. The nationality of the person holding the tool is irrelevant.

 

[Danger]

Qantas has now responded to verbal questions placed on notice at the senate inquiry into this bill. (Answers to written questions are apparently delayed.) All responses are a matter of public record and are available here. Some of the answers are particularly interesting, including:



Question 10 provides detailed information on the error that saw the Qantas website continuing to sell tickets after the grounding had been announced.

Question 11 provides information on investment in Qantas international.

To my mind, the word "formal" in answer to question seven only adds fuel to the unions' claim that the lockout was pre-meditated.

 

[simongr]

To my mind, the word "formal" in answer to question seven only adds fuel to the unions' claim that the lockout was pre-meditated.

By pre-meditated do you mean "planned"? I certainly hope it was planned and that management wouldn't just call a lock out and then think about how to notify their employees.

Do people really think that AJ has implied that he woke up on Saturday morning and decided to do a lock out?

 

[dk4]

claim that the lockout was pre-meditated

So did the CEO have the authority to take the action without board approval, as part of his delegated authority to run the business – yes. But he decided to acquiesce to the board by calling a meeting on the Saturday morning. (Thereby creating this particular artificial “point in time”.)


I have little doubt that the whole event wasn’t planned and details/actions set in place prior to the Saturday morning.

However, it wasn’t until the Saturday morning that the board officially said “yes – do it.”

At any point up until that time, it may not have gone ahead, and simply been written off as a planning/contingency exercise.

AND if the board had said “no – don’t do it” then the whole exercise would have been scuttled.

The question though is - was the board aware of the gist of action before hand, and had the chairman or any other members given indication of tacit approval – which would demonstrate that the real decision to accept the plan was given prior to their Saturday morning meeting with the CEO, making it a sham - effecting when notifications should have been made.

 

[simongr]

Boards can give approval in principle to any action but until the board "votes" on a particular action the decision isn't really made.

For example the Board could have said "We are ok with you planning the lock out and working out what it will cost and put in place the actions required, then on the day of the proposed action we can review the position and "approve" a go ahead". That isn't a sham and is how business works.

 

[serfty]

The lock out was definitely planned ... as an option.

The selection of this option not until the Saturday morning.

This was all indicated on both the Nov 4 transcript (http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/s428.pdf) and the answers to verbal questions (https://senate.aph.gov.au/submissio....aspx?id=f13eed06-7021-4bc3-8c9d-b64ed54798c8).

 

[dk4]

That isn't a sham and is how business works.

It is only your opinion - that it wasn't a sham, I am still unsure, and look forward to more appropriate investigation by our Senators, in our Parliament.

 

[Danger]

By pre-meditated do you mean "planned"? I certainly hope it was planned and that management wouldn't just call a lock out and then think about how to notify their employees.

Do people really think that AJ has implied that he woke up on Saturday morning and decided to do a lock out?

Yes, planned. Joyce's evidence to the inquiry was that the lockout was not planned at anytime before Saturday morning at the earliest.

Boards can give approval in principle to any action but until the board "votes" on a particular action the decision isn't really made.

For example the Board could have said "We are ok with you planning the lock out and working out what it will cost and put in place the actions required, then on the day of the proposed action we can review the position and "approve" a go ahead". That isn't a sham and is how business works.

Although the board did give unanimous support, Joyce was very clear in his evidence that it was entirely his decision to ground the fleet and did not require board approval.

 

[simongr]

It is only your opinion - that it wasn't a sham, I am still unsure, and look forward to more appropriate investigation by our Senators, in our Parliament.

I would prefer the Senators stay out of the management of listed companies and work on the many real problems facing the country. And that is definitely my opinion.

 

[serfty]

I would prefer the Senators stay out of the management of listed companies and work on the many real problems facing the country. And that is definitely my opinion.

Maybe some senators consider listed companies be the problem ...