Qantas workers prepare to strike

[Yada Yada]

Qantas workers prepare to strike
By Scott Rochfort
February 24, 2006

QANTAS heavy maintenance workers are mobilising for strike action after the national carrier unexpectedly called off enterprise bargaining talks with unions yesterday.

Adding confusion to the situation, Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon called off a briefing slated for this morning where he was expected to announce whether the airline would outsource its widebody heavy maintenance overseas.

Qantas's head of people, Kevin Brown, said Qantas called off the "engineering transformation" update because of last-minute delays but said a decision was imminent.

"There are some discussions with some other interested parties that we … [have] not sorted out," he said. Mr Brown declined to say whether the "interested parties" included a foreign maintenance facility.

More...

This has been brewing for a while now. I wonder if QF have been delaying the decision until close to the Commonwealth Games to raise the stakes with the union?

 

[Dave Noble]

They could be trying to delay it so that when they do announce it, it will be too close to the Games for them to arrange a strike during that period


Dave

 

[NM]

and won't striking just show everyone why Qantas needs to move the work away from the local Unions?

 

[Yada Yada]

and won't striking just show everyone why Qantas needs to move the work away from the local Unions?

It would certainly make the unions look bad, which is perhaps why QF may be delaying the announcement. Clever play if that's the case. But I guess the unions might not care given what's at stake - their livelihood and existence.

There are lots of empty seats on O7 just waiting to be filled if QF is grounded.

 

[shillard]

and won't striking just show everyone why Qantas needs to move the work away from the local Unions?

You would think that the communist fools might have learned their lesson from Ansett.

Rule #1 of survival - don't foul your own nest. These clowns can't even take a hint from across the Pacific (gee, why ARE so many US Airlines hitting the wall? 9/11? I don't think so, Tim.....).

Hopefully Dixon will fire the lot of the bludgers out of spite and give the work to people who are actually prepared to WORK.

 

[dajop]

There are lots of empty seats on O7 just waiting to be filled if QF is grounded.

Lot might be a bit of an exaggeration .... 7 flights of a 60 seat aircraft running @50% load factor is not enough to take the pax of just 1 767 flight.

I think SQ could make some mileage out of it .... bet there already planning which aircraft they could divert here to transport stranded pax ..

 

[MIKEs]

and won't striking just show everyone why Qantas needs to move the work away from the local Unions?

You would think that the communist fools might have learned their lesson from Ansett.

Rule #1 of survival - don't foul your own nest. These clowns can't even take a hint from across the Pacific (gee, why ARE so many US Airlines hitting the wall? 9/11? I don't think so, Tim.....).

Hopefully Dixon will fire the lot of the bludgers out of spite and give the work to people who are actually prepared to WORK.

Ha, Dixon & co are only interested in Lining there own pockets they dont give a rats about there staff, hence wanting to move more jobs offshore, Why is it that QF has such an envious safety record??? Because its been performed by highly skilled trades people here in Australia :!: Not in some backlot in China or some other far flung outpost.

 

[aus_flyer]

Inside word on good authority is that maintenance will be moving offshore. The decision has been made - just not announced.

 

[Gazza]

I have a high opinion of Qantas staff, I cannot say the same about the senior management.

Their is no prize in the race for the lowest common denominator.

 

[shillard]

Ha, Dixon & co are only interested in Lining there own pockets they dont give a rats about there staff, hence wanting to move more jobs offshore, Why is it that QF has such an envious safety record??? Because its been performed by highly skilled trades people here in Australia :!: Not in some backlot in China or some other far flung outpost.

So what, yellow men can't maintain planes as well as white men? Bloody racist.

They want to move more jobs offshore because lazy bludger Australians continue to foul their own nest.

Because while QF is profitable, it is only so by airline standards. It can't hold a candle to businesses in other sectors.

Because lazy union bludgers want to drag everyone down to the lowest common denominator (witness the useless scrotes in dispute with Boeing @ Williamtown - terrified of an employment contract where higher performers are paid more, because that inevitably means the inverse also applies).

Who could blame them?

 

[Gazza]

Shillard

What make you assume that it will be MEN who maintain the planes? - bloody sexist

As a Kiwi I cant find it in me to stick up for Australians (unless you are from a non-ANZAC country).

If Qantas is such a bad business, suggest you start by giving the manager's a bullocking. They set the direction and tone of the organisation.

The vast majority of Qantas staff I have dealt with are excellent!

 

[Guest]

and won't striking just show everyone why Qantas needs to move the work away from the local Unions?

You would think that the communist fools might have learned their lesson from Ansett.

Rule #1 of survival - don't foul your own nest. These clowns can't even take a hint from across the Pacific (gee, why ARE so many US Airlines hitting the wall? 9/11? I don't think so, Tim.....).

Hopefully Dixon will fire the lot of the bludgers out of spite and give the work to people who are actually prepared to WORK.

haha (y)

 

[JohnK]

Don't we support China's economy enough already?

 

[one9]

Don't we support China's economy enough already?

it is two way. china will support our economy by lowering costs and allowing qantas to provide greater returns to many australian shareholders, and australia will support china by providing more jobs for workers.

this is a great thing.

reducing costs is increasing efficiency. in fact by reducing costs, qantas, if they wanted could put more into safety and maitanence by spending the same dollars but getting higher quality parts and equipment (as less needs to be spent on wages).

the less of qantas's workforce that is unionised the better. this way qantas will operate with less disruptions from strikes and us as passengers will face less disruptions.

 

[JohnK]

it is two way. china will support our economy by lowering costs and allowing qantas to provide greater returns to many australian shareholders, and australia will support china by providing more jobs for workers.

this is a great thing.

reducing costs is increasing efficiency. in fact by reducing costs, qantas, if they wanted could put more into safety and maitanence by spending the same dollars but getting higher quality parts and equipment (as less needs to be spent on wages).

the less of qantas's workforce that is unionised the better. this way qantas will operate with less disruptions from strikes and us as passengers will face less disruptions.

Agree with what you say but can't help thinking how Chinese products are cheap and inferior. Doesn't matter what you buy, whether it be clothes, appliances, household equipment, spare parts etc there is no quality, they do not last. I suppose you get what you pay for but.... I try to avoid Chinese products as much as possible and like to spend a little more to get a better quality product manufactured elsewhere, Japan, Germany, Sweden.

Will this be reflected in the maintenance? Cutting corners? Cheap parts used even though premium parts may be paid for by QF?

Suppose we will never know unless they get a chance to prove themselves. That decision is in the hands of others and I hope they are making the decision for the right reasons and do not sacriface safety just to save a few bucks that will only end up back in the executives hands as a bonus anyway.

 

[Guest]

does this mean QF will have the same awesome quality maintanence workers that Air China does?

 

[Yada Yada]

Lot might be a bit of an exaggeration .... 7 flights of a 60 seat aircraft running @50% load factor is not enough to take the pax of just 1 767 flight.

Yes, you're right. Although I was thinking of it from O7's perspective. 8)

 

[Yada Yada]

Rule #1 of survival - don't foul your own nest. These clowns can't even take a hint from across the Pacific (gee, why ARE so many US Airlines hitting the wall? 9/11? I don't think so, Tim.....).

Hopefully Dixon will fire the lot of the bludgers out of spite and give the work to people who are actually prepared to WORK.

Your comments would be fair if management applied the same standard to themselves. They are very highly paid - witness the recently departed head of IT who was on an enormous salary (>$1 million, IIRC). Not saying there is anything wrong with that in principle, but by your own admission QF "...can't hold a candle to businesses in other sectors" so perhaps it is time for a cleanout at the top.

 

[JohnK]

Your comments would be fair if management applied the same standard to themselves. They are very highly paid - witness the recently departed head of IT who was on an enormous salary (>$1 million, IIRC). Not saying there is anything wrong with that in principle, but by your own admission QF "...can't hold a candle to businesses in other sectors" so perhaps it is time for a cleanout at the top.

I think you are right. Rather than getting rid of more pawns the time might be right to clean out some top management.

A few years ago I received a notice for the AGM from a medium sized company I have shares in and noticed that one of the motions was to grant the managing director $750,000 worth of options "as incentive to perform his duties in the coming year". I thought his $2 million salary was incentive enough.

 

[oz_mark]

Qantas shift hurts safety image: poll

There's a report in the Australian about how the safety image of Qantas will be hurt by shifting the maintenance overseas. See http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18281420%5E2702,00.html

QANTAS'S reputation for safety could take a battering if it defies popular opinion and moves at least 2500 heavy maintenance jobs overseas, a survey has found.

With the airline poised to announce a decision on its long-haul maintenance work as early as this week, the threat of industrial action has been heightened by what unions say is a surprising degree of support for a campaign to keep the work at home.

Several federal ministers and the federal Opposition have urged the airline to keep the work in Australia after the Howard Government's decision last week to protect Qantas from competition from Singapore Airlines on its lucrative US routes.