Why is Alan Joyce still Qantas' CEO?

[Melburnian1]

AirKat, sin't Southwest Airlines in the United States of America an example of a profitable, financially stable airline that is not propped up by a government?:

Southwest Airlines Flies High on Record Profits, AirTran Integration (LUV)

largely, though, you are correct. Southwest may be one of the few exceptions to the rule that you quote.

 

[moa999]

although even southwest is having employee issues
Southwest employees strike over pay, outsourcing - Chicago News and Weather | FOX 32 News

and a recent survey showed that other airlines (ignoring bag fees which are free for elites)
were cheaper than Southwest 60% of the time on head to head routes

 

[castie]

Ryanair are still doing well no?
Think they banned unions or something like that so should have less staff issues.

Also not knocking the guy at all.
Hard job he has to do.
Can you imagine the reputation a guy brought in to trim the fat on the government paid list?
Similar position he finds himself in.

 

[drivatruk]

i try to not knock someone doing a job i couldn't do...

 

[ajw373]

The problem is AJ is ex DeathStar and all he knows is LCC :mrgreen:

Conveniently forgetting of course his time at Ansett, which was a full service airline and lets not forget Aer Lingus which was also a full service airline when he worked there.

PS if being involved in an LCC is a bad thing, what is the name of one of the other people that was up to his eyeballs in the creation of Jetstar. Let me think, um, um, yeah a guy named John Borghetti. Where is he now?

 

[medhead]

i try to not knock someone doing a job i couldn't do...

I have enough experience with a whole range of leaders to be able to judge performance. Same way that I can't do my dentists job, but I can separate a bad dentist from a goo dentist.

 

[jt1983]

I don't think taking away worker's rights is some kind magic bullet to fix Qantas' problems. As was mentioned before, while Joyce has had a difficult job to do, I don't think that's an excuse for the terrible calls he's made.

 

[zachary.august]

The grounding of the fleet was the single, most decisive event in Joyce's tenure. He managed to end the industrial disputes that were crippling QF. Although, the whole JQ Asia bull**** was unnecessary I do think that he saved QF from becoming even more of a rump carrier.

 

[craven morehead]

Conveniently forgetting of course his time at Ansett, which was a full service airline and lets not forget Aer Lingus which was also a full service airline when he worked there.

PS if being involved in an LCC is a bad thing, what is the name of one of the other people that was up to his eyeballs in the creation of Jetstar. Let me think, um, um, yeah a guy named John Borghetti. Where is he now?

Point taken about him having been involved with Full service airlines but with Ansett being no longer and Aer Lingus not being a full service last time I flew with them in 2008 is there some connection here to AJ ? Point also taken with JB

 

[ajw373]

Point taken about him having been involved with Full service airlines but with Ansett being no longer and Aer Lingus not being a full service last time I flew with them in 2008 is there some connection here to AJ ?

Only if you want to read something into it that may or may not be there.

 

[medhead]

The grounding of the fleet was the single, most decisive event in Joyce's tenure. He managed to end the industrial disputes that were crippling QF.

Disputes that arose because of his inability to lead the workforce to change. He is getting paid the big dollars to prevent that stuff instead it fanned the flames with his public statements.

 

[ajw373]

Disputes that arose because of his inability to lead the workforce to change. He is getting paid the big dollars to prevent that stuff instead it fanned the flames with his public statements.

In your opinion of course. Quite clearly those who pay his income think differently otherwise he would be out on his ear.

 

[777]

Disputes that arose because of his inability to lead the workforce to change. He is getting paid the big dollars to prevent that stuff instead it fanned the flames with his public statements.

And, more to the point, essentially imposed the status quo on qantas through the binding arbitration process. A massive lost opportunity to reform work practices in the airline lost in a whirl of public posturing and a basic failure of leadership. The moment qantas grounded the airline that lost all ability to bargain and were lumped with what was imposed on them.

 

[codash1099]

The grounding of the fleet was the single, most decisive event in Joyce's tenure. He managed to end the industrial disputes that were crippling QF. Although, the whole JQ Asia bull**** was unnecessary I do think that he saved QF from becoming even more of a rump carrier.

Ahem. Many would say that, at least as far as QFi is concerned, it is a rump carrier.

 

[medhead]

In your opinion of course. Quite clearly those who pay his income think differently otherwise he would be out on his ear.

So you disagree that work practices at Qantas needed to change and you disagree that engaging and lead the workforce is the most efficient way to affect change. Interesting opinion you have.

Otherwise, I think post #2 covers your point sufficiently. Call it opinion but at least it's based on observation of events and outcomes.

 

[eastwest101]

So you disagree that work practices at Qantas needed to change and you disagree that engaging and lead the workforce is the most efficient way to affect change. Interesting opinion you have.

Otherwise, I think post #2 covers your point sufficiently. Call it opinion but at least it's based on observation of events and outcomes.

Interesting to refer back to Post #2 where medhead plus some other posters here seem to suggest that like Turkeys Voting for Thanksgiving - the board and possibly large institutional shareholders also have some blame to share for QF's current position. What I want to know is - at what point will either the institutional shareholders get sick of the board, or the board get sick and tired of Alan Joyce? I suspect it may be the "Instos" whom tire of a lack of dividends and a decreasing share price that may eventually force something to happen, or failing that, it may have to go all the way to either new owners or even receivers before large scale changes of management and then the airline follow.

 

[777]

Interesting to refer back to Post #2 where medhead plus some other posters here seem to suggest that like Turkeys Voting for Thanksgiving - the board and possibly large institutional shareholders also have some blame to share for QF's current position. What I want to know is - at what point will either the institutional shareholders get sick of the board, or the board get sick and tired of Alan Joyce? I suspect it may be the "Instos" whom tire of a lack of dividends and a decreasing share price that may eventually force something to happen, or failing that, it may have to go all the way to either new owners or even receivers before large scale changes of management and then the airline follow.

It's an equally good question to ask why the board and/or chair are still there?

 

[ajw373]

So you disagree that work practices at Qantas needed to change and you disagree that engaging and lead the workforce is the most efficient way to affect change. Interesting opinion you have.

Otherwise, I think post #2 covers your point sufficiently. Call it opinion but at least it's based on observation of events and outcomes.

I am saying no such thing, don't think I have expressed my PERSONAL view in this thread, and if I did I would make it clear it is my personal view. You (or me or I reckon anyone on this board) have no idea what so ever what Joyce has been paid by the board to do.

 

[777]

I am saying no such thing, don't think I have expressed my PERSONAL view in this thread, and if I did I would make it clear it is my personal view. You (or me or I reckon anyone on this board) have no idea what so ever what Joyce has been paid by the board to do.

Yes I do, I know that a major part of the gig is to "increase shareholder value" as per any public company CEO.

How's he doing at that?

 

[medhead]

I am saying no such thing, don't think I have expressed my PERSONAL view in this thread, and if I did I would make it clear it is my personal view. You (or me or I reckon anyone on this board) have no idea what so ever what Joyce has been paid by the board to do.

Not sure why else you would decide to make a comment about "my opinion" and then make a point that I've already addressed in the second post to this thread. Unless to disagree with my post and those 2 points are the crux of my position. So if you disagree with me, you must disagree with the basis of my position.

As for the instructions given to Joyce by the board, I do not need to know those instructions to observe the actions that he has taken and judge those actions accordingly. I also have the benefit of knowing the mission that Joyce has publicly given himself. He has stated there is a need for change, and I can't think of anyone who would disagree. That is a fact not my opinion. Joyce publicly attacked the workforce over change - again fact not opinion. Joyce grounded the airline to affect change - fact not opinion. Finally, that ground failed to achieve any significant change. We can see that he has done a poor job at initiated change. If he has been given the job of creating change as joyce claims then his performance is there for all to see.

Or are you suggesting that the board has told Joyce to alienate the qantas workforce and maintain the status quo?