Qatar Airways to acquire 25% of Virgin Australia

[justinbrett]

I’m smart enough to realise that Qantas writes a formal letter to someone like ACCC they should write what they mean, not something else. And when they give a reference to support a statement, the statement should reflect what the reference says, not something else.

“Qatari” does not mean 'crew working as Qatari residents' (or even Qatari residents working as crew ) It means 'of Qatar'. International airline crew for a particular national airline can be residents of anywhere and that’s covered in what the reference actually said.I think many Qantas crew are residents of countries other than Australia.

Further, if Qantas was smart enough, they would’ve reference the EU situation you mention rather than referencing ECAC recommendations and implying some sort of jurisdictional decision there.

Its a sloppy and carelessly written letter and worthy of the name 'amateur' especially when you consider the recipient would be well aware of Qantas' past behaviour in relation to employment laws and the hiring foreign pilots and cabin crew.

I disagree. Qatari is the adjective. It doesn’t necessarily mandate nationality.

We would say Kiwi crew for any employee of JetConnect without requiring NZ citizenship. American crew, could involve a number of Mexicans and Canadians working with visas.

ECAC are the perfect body to cite as they set the standards for Europe.

Fortunately ACCC aren’t spiteful, they will address the concerns on merit without an agenda.

 

[simmomelb]

We would say Kiwi crew for any employee of JetConnect without requiring NZ citizenship. American crew, could involve a number of Mexicans and Canadians working with visas.

Well I hate to point out the obvious, but Mexicans and Canadians, are, American, given that's the continent they reside in
It reminds me of a Flight Centre advertisement for "Europe AND England".

 

[justinbrett]

Well I hate to point out the obvious, but Mexicans and Canadians, are, American, given that's the continent they reside in
It reminds me of a Flight Centre advertisement for "Europe AND England".

I can guarantee no sane Canadian or Mexican refers to themselves as American.

 

[p--and--t]

It reminds me of a Flight Centre advertisement for "Europe AND England".

Sometimes these things are complicated and hard to understand even for “mainstream media”.

 

[simmomelb]

I can guarantee no sane Canadian or Mexican refers to themselves as American.

Sure about that?
You've just offended some family members, they are sane and laugh when people refer to America as the only the USA, they question people's knowledge of geography.
Just as I have family from Brasil, who definitely consider themselves American.

 

[ben95]

Its a sloppy and carelessly written letter and worthy of the name 'amateur' especially when you consider the recipient would be well aware of Qantas' past behaviour in relation to employment laws and the hiring foreign pilots and cabin crew.

It's madness how Qantas was able to write a letter like this with a straight face. Qantas, under Alan Joyce, poinerred the use of cheap labour in this sector here in Australia, whether that's foreign based crew or through labour hire.

The issue raised, it's a valid point, but it's laughable when it came out of the mouth of Qantas - perfect example of the Qantas culture and approch to use the law only when it suits them as depicted in Joe Aston's book.

 

[RooFlyer]

I disagree. Qatari is the adjective. It doesn’t necessarily mandate nationality.

In that case, we actually agree – again!

Fortunately ACCC aren’t spiteful, they will address the concerns on merit without an agenda.

There’s <are some members> here who definitely think the ACCC are spiteful and have an agenda!

 

[p--and--t]

poinerred the use of cheap labour

Understand your comment but hardly true in wider context. Filipino ex pat painters and maintenance staff stuck on WA oil rigs for up to 12 month's with salary of <$10k pa comes to mind. Taiwanese workers on QLD farms for month's on end working long hours 7dpw for <$50pd net.

 

[ben95]

Understand your comment but hardly true in wider context

I didn't mean that. It's specifically for the aviation sector - pilots, crew or ground handling.

 

[p--and--t]

I didn't mean that. It's specifically for the aviation sector - pilots, crew or ground handling.

And you think the middle east carriers haven't been doing for yonks?

 

[justinbrett]

Sure about that?
You've just offended some family members, they are sane and laugh when people refer to America as the only the USA, they question people's knowledge of geography.
Just as I have family from Brasil, who definitely consider themselves American.

Yep. This is off topic, but American is the correct demonym for people who live in the US. In most Spanish speaking countries, americano is also correct.

A big difference in calling the continent America and calling yourself an American. From my travels there are big differences in each country with what they call theirselves. In the south I’m sure some do but not Mexicans or Canadians because they know if they call themselves an American people will assume they mean from the US.

 

[simmomelb]

Yep. This is off topic, but American is the correct demonym for people who live in the US. In most Spanish speaking countries, americano is also correct.

Americano (masc) and Americana (fem) in Portuguese (which Brasilians speak) and also in Spanish directly translates to American lol
If you live in the continent of America, you are American.
Don't tell a Brasilian they aren't American unless you want to be called stupid lol

 

[justinbrett]

Americano (masc) and Americana (fem) in Portuguese (which Brasilians speak) and also in Spanish directly translates to American lol
If you live in the continent of America, you are American.
Don't tell a Brasilian they aren't American unless you want to be called stupid lol

Yes exactly the same as English.

Take it up with the RAE. Americano means both people from the continent and people from the US specifically.

The closer you are to the US the greater the chance for confusion, which is why it’s not used in Mexico or Canada except in the USA context.

 

[ben95]

And you think the middle east carriers haven't been doing for yonks?

I don't know so I made no comment on any other airline's labour pratices. I'm simply pointing out the irony behind the Qantas letter to ACCC.

Though I also think there's a distinction between being able to pay your staff less money with worse condition due to your local labour market or protections vs what Qantas did actively trying to exploit holes in the larbour laws.

 

[elanshin]

I think we're going a bit too off topic here. We get the broad point QF is making which whilst they themselves are guilty of, is still a valid point.

Basically the main concerns here and reflected in the submissions is the exclusivity of QR, and the vague nature of wetlease planes with no transition.

Ill bring up one possible other situation that is a concern (even if its small and unlikely). What happens if QR and QF make up and are buddy buddy in the future?

 

[serfty]

[Moderator Hat]

Please refer to the topic of this thread.

Some recent discussion are on a theme has veered markedly from that.

While there was a consideration relevant to the topic linking to that theme, this is no longer been discussed.

Please continue discussing "Qatar Airways to acquire 25% of Virgin Australia".
​

[/Moderator Hat]

 

[N860CR]

I recall raising the issue of wetleasing when when QF started using AY who were using Thai based cabin crew with Finland based tech crew to operate services from Australia to Singapore (did I cover it all? I think so).

I recall being shutdown for being “racist” for suggesting that it’s wrong for an Australian company to outsource Australian services with Australian flight numbers to foreign crew on foreign aircraft (likely being paid with lower foreign wages).

I recall thinking it was odd that people in Australia who benefit fit from our high wages thinking this was acceptable.

Perhaps it would be best if our government, who we pay a lot of money to, pull their finger out and do their job? Their job is to protect ours.

 

[Human]

Perhaps it would be best if our government, who we pay a lot of money to, pull their finger out and do their job? Their job is to protect ours.

But of course it's not as simple as that (as I'm sure you know too). Our government's "job" is not just "to protect ours". It's also to protect Australian consumers. On occasion, what's best for the consumer is not what's best for a company or, by extension, its employees.

That, after all, is why we have an ACCC. Its entire role is to protect Australian consumers and if that means less money for the companies the ACCC targets (including less money to employ people), then so be it.

Whatever the merits of these particular situations (Qantas wetleasing planes and Virgin intending to), there's a balancing act between benefiting the consumer by, theoretically, increasing supply and thereby reducing prices, and between benefiting employees.

To return to the topic of VA's proposed partial sale to QR and wetleasing of planes: the reason there has been so much debate about this is because it can't legitimately be reduced to slogans and truisms (eg. the government's job "is to protect ours").

It's way, way more complex than that, and there are strong arguments on both sides, as a cursory reading of this thread would reveal!

 

[simmomelb]

An interesting article in today's AFR for those interested.
Particularly around international crews.

There are plenty of dangers for Qantas in Virgin’s Qatar tie-up

The flying kangaroo says it welcomes competition – except from the Gulf airline – as investors fear the deal could cause havoc with its international division.

www.afr.com

 

[drron]

And from that article possible explanation as to why VA is changing Velocity.

The immediate risk posed by the Virgin-Qatar alliance is to the Qantas frequent flyer program’s dominance. Qantas Frequent Flyer earned 3.3 times more for each member than Virgin Australia Velocity in the year to June 30.
“Adding long-haul services to Virgin’s limited domestic and short-haul network will improve the appeal of its Velocity frequent flyer program and … close that gap with Qantas,” says Jarden’s Jakob Cakarnis.

But a hint of hypocrisy in QF's submission.

And there is one problem with Qantas’ complaint about Virgin’s access to lower-cost crew through Qatar. Qantas uses staff based in the United Kingdom to fly into Australia and on flights to Singapore.

According to the Flight Attendants Association, they are paid about $20 an hour, compared to the $56 an hour those directly employed by the airline earn. Qantas hasn’t directly hired crew on those flights since 2008.