juddles
Suspended
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2011
- Posts
- 5,283
- Qantas
- Platinum 1
Qantas always gets many comments and feelings. We have within the forum everyone from basic pax to Qantas pilots.
Having watched these perspectives over many years, I get a sense that Qantas is somehow special. Despite it being a true independent company, there seem to me to be many opinions that do not see it as such. Everything from the CEO's wage to day-to-day changes. What is it that we believe of this airline? Is it an independent company? (I think the answer is yes) But if it it is so, why do we think that it should be pax-focused rather than shareholder focused?
I understand the misgivings of employees that want the best deal. I understand the desire by pax for things that are best for them. But what I see in the whole matrix is that Qantas is somehow viewed as the beast it tries to be with its sales pitch - the "Aussie" airline. Hence the expectations. Even though it is not.
I think I realized many years ago that despite my love of the concept of a true "Aussie" airline, this is just another business. It is not a thing created for the benefit of its employees. Or the passengers. It is strictly an entity that exists to try to make money for its shareholders. All businesses in Australia are like that, but with Qantas, they get held to a different expectation.
Why are we so (as a group) so socialist when it comes to Qantas? Do we desire that entity be Aussie and of the people?
I find myself defending much of what Qantas does. But I do it from the perspective of respecting that it is a private company. I feel that many here do not see that, and are held back by the nostalgia that Qantas is a public entity. It is not, it has not been for many years.
But despite what I say in support of Qantas, I also hold the desire in my heart that it could be public company. That it could make decisions based on support for its staff and customers.
And i see as truth that this is not the real case, so everyone, again from pax to pilots, will just get constantly disappointed.
Qantas is a company. They are not a public service. If there was scope for something better, it would have appeared.
Having watched these perspectives over many years, I get a sense that Qantas is somehow special. Despite it being a true independent company, there seem to me to be many opinions that do not see it as such. Everything from the CEO's wage to day-to-day changes. What is it that we believe of this airline? Is it an independent company? (I think the answer is yes) But if it it is so, why do we think that it should be pax-focused rather than shareholder focused?
I understand the misgivings of employees that want the best deal. I understand the desire by pax for things that are best for them. But what I see in the whole matrix is that Qantas is somehow viewed as the beast it tries to be with its sales pitch - the "Aussie" airline. Hence the expectations. Even though it is not.
I think I realized many years ago that despite my love of the concept of a true "Aussie" airline, this is just another business. It is not a thing created for the benefit of its employees. Or the passengers. It is strictly an entity that exists to try to make money for its shareholders. All businesses in Australia are like that, but with Qantas, they get held to a different expectation.
Why are we so (as a group) so socialist when it comes to Qantas? Do we desire that entity be Aussie and of the people?
I find myself defending much of what Qantas does. But I do it from the perspective of respecting that it is a private company. I feel that many here do not see that, and are held back by the nostalgia that Qantas is a public entity. It is not, it has not been for many years.
But despite what I say in support of Qantas, I also hold the desire in my heart that it could be public company. That it could make decisions based on support for its staff and customers.
And i see as truth that this is not the real case, so everyone, again from pax to pilots, will just get constantly disappointed.
Qantas is a company. They are not a public service. If there was scope for something better, it would have appeared.