Qantas/Union meeting today

[old_mate]

Hopefully todays meeting will give a clearer indication of what fate lies for the 2500 odd people working under Qantas' Engineering Heavy Maintenance banner.

It's quite a depressing place to work at the moment, many guys are facing a loss of income, many have large mortgages, and even if they dont get made redundant, no doubt the remaining guys will be facing pay cuts (Geoff Dixon has been quoted as saying Australian Maintenance Engineers get paid too much, he wants to see them paid about 10-15G less per year, yet gives himself a 6 million bonus last financial year).

Whats the general feeling around the forums? If you knew Qantas' was sending its widebody heavy maintenance to China, (747 fleet mainly) would it encourage you to fly with another airline? Would you be happy for Qantas' to then still maintain it's slogan as "The Spirit of Australia"?

[4.9 EF Futura]

I agree that it sucks to see hard working australians put out of the job. I also feel for you guys working there, one should be able to get on with the job at hand without the "cloud" hanging over your head about the future. Corporate decisions are corporate decisions but regardless of the outcome, the employees deserve to get straight answers.

Should carlify a few points tho - Geoff Dixon doesnt pay himself anything. That's a board decision. Im not a fan of payments like that but let's get the facts straight.

I wouldnt stop flying with Qantas though. Im sure this comment will go down well - but i dont feel i owe the employees of this company anything. I wouldnt expect them to come to my rescue if i were put out of the job either. I was retrenched from my last job when it was purchsaed by an international - but that didnt get any publicity because it wasnt a large, iconic company.

[parawolf]

I would stop flying QANTAS in a heartbeat regardless if Singapore Airlines was allowed fair and open competition within Australian airspace, including the AUS <-> USA route.

Flying either QANTAS or United on these ultra profitable routes are just wrong. Singapore Airlines in my opinion cannot be beat for customer service.

[old_mate]

Yes you are correct in saying the board approved Mr Dixon's pay increase...as well as their own. Mr Dixon could have declined the increase lol. That 6 mill could have paid a yearly wage for about 60 Licensed blokes...

...fair enough comments about you not feeling like you 'owe' anyone anything. I was talking more a 'piece of mind' situation knowing the aircraft you are flying in has been subjected to cut price maintenance. Whether Qantas' safety record is subject to change (assuming the decision is to outsource) will be a wait and see affair. I'd probably be inclined to say no, as I bet once a plane returns from Maintenance Qantas will do another smaller check on it anyway to make sure things were done properly. Who knows.

[all4ford]

I really feel for all the employees who may lose a job, but business is business. Qantas is just another company with shareholders, who expect it to perform as most profitable as it possibly can.

[4.9 EF Futura]

Originally Posted by old_mate

Yes you are correct in saying the board approved Mr Dixon's pay increase...as well as their own. Mr Dixon could have declined the increase lol. That 6 mill could have paid a yearly wage for about 60 Licensed blokes...

As much as it pains me to say it... i dont know if I could knock back $6mio... lol. And yeah - i think the directors are paying themselves $100k + $40k for each committee they sit on. Disgusting - seeing as the directors probably sit on a handful of other boards as well.

...fair enough comments about you not feeling like you 'owe' anyone anything. I was talking more a 'piece of mind' situation knowing the aircraft you are flying in has been subjected to cut price maintenance. Whether Qantas' safety record is subject to change (assuming the decision is to outsource) will be a wait and see affair. I'd probably be inclined to say no, as I bet once a plane returns from Maintenance Qantas will do another smaller check on it anyway to make sure things were done properly. Who knows.

Ah cool - thanks for the clarification! From what ive read it's maintenance of the international fleet that they are looking to move. I fly interstate all the time but seldom fly OS... what i am concerned about is if you dont fly Qantas OS then who do you fly with? It seems like Qantas are moving into line with "world's best practice" for the maintenance... does this mean all international carriers are cutting costs? Might just vacation at home...

[svo347]

Originally Posted by all4ford

I really feel for all the employees who may lose a job, but business is business. Qantas is just another company with shareholders, who expect it to perform as most profitable as it possibly can.

Obviously at the expense of peoples ways of life...
Good Luck to em...

[MightyXR6Turbo]

I don't usually use QANTAS, I never fly them on domestic as I can't justify the extra expense to get a meal during the flight, also in saying that, I have considered QANTAS for an overseas trip, but if they move their maintenance to China, then I will not fly with them at all. Of all places to go, China has a horrid record of plane crashes due to shotty maintenance! I will give that a miss.

It is also compounded by the fact that Adelaide only has two QANTAS international flights, one to and from Singapore/Darwin and one to and from Auckland. That, and it is easier to fly with Malaysian or Singapore Airlines to wherever I want to go.

I am just still annoyed with AirNZ destroying Ansett, but that is a different story again.

[old_mate]

'World's best practise' does indeed mean other airlines are either cutting costs

or have a structure in place already whereas their maintenance costs aren't huge, more often than not by continually upgrading their fleets.

[Sourbastard]

Qantas maintainence is second to none, their record speaks for itself.
Customers recognize that quality, and back it up buy buying the service.
Remove the quality for some offshore savings, risk a crash with fatalities, and you can kiss your airline goodbye. Maintainence is a corner stone of any airline, and you dont screw with that corner stones unless you like watching airliners plummit into the ground.

Enough accidents have happened to prove that you dont cut corners or seek savings in maintainence of an aircraft. What you save in maintainence, you pay back in legal fees and settlements to families when a 747 hits the side of a mountain.

Dixon is an idiot.

[Tote]

Some interesting parallels there with outsourcing IT Jobs to India, although all too often the corporation realsises everyone else in the industry is doing it and they must do it to compete. It is a safer proposition to the beancounters and ultimately the shareholders than promoting keeping the jobs in country as a quality differentiator.
Regards,
Tote

[Sourbastard]

Hence why so many people in the forums are looking for work Tote. I know plenty of accountants in corporations preaching the virtues of offshore support until they are on the phone to Pakistan trying to fix a problem. Then all of a sudden its not a good system. Funny that.

[Ringo]

I'm not going to be making any friends here with these comments but here goes

If this is what Qantas has to do to ensure long term viability and survival then they should do it. If someone can do something for you cheaper than you can do it yourself its called outsourcing. I work for a company that does exactly that - takes an administrative task from our customers and does it better and cheaper than our customers can do it themselves.

The International Aircraft Maintenance Business in Bangkok and Singapore is massive. They look after Aircraft from national carriers all over the world. There is so many regulations to do with maintenance of aircraft that I would not feel that my safety is threatened is the jet was maintained outside Australia. Virgin get their maintenance done in Bangkok now don't they.....wonder why?

It ИИИИes me off that the Qantas workers are protesting and threatening to strike on the eve of the games. That it blackmail, and dare I say it 'terrorism' of Australia's international reputation just when we are about to have the spotlight placed on us. That is sure acting like our great patriotic International Airline isn't it? I know their Union is to blame....after all the Union has secured such good pay rates for its members that it is making Aircraft Maintenance in Australia un-viable....

Airlines are expensive businesses to run and when things are good they make a lot of money. Airlines are also fickle businesses very sensitive to:

The economy (when no-one has any money, they holiday at home)
Terrorism - When Sept 11 happened it sent Ansett under and many others to the wall - Qantas lost a couple of hundred million.....remember that ?
Fuel costs soaring - there is a cost that Qantas can't control which has cost them money

From the previous post you saying that each Maintenance Engineer is getting paid $100,000 buck a year....the same as EF Futura was saying was 'Disgusting'

15g a year less works out to be $900k a year saving..Your Union has done a great job - no wonder outsourcing is looking cheaper to Management.

All4Ford said it best - I really feel for all the employees who may lose a job, but business is business. Qantas is just another company with shareholders, who expect it to perform as most profitable as it possibly can.

And finally I will still happily fly with Qantas and give them first and last chance but I will not pay a premium over another carrier to do so.....no matter how attractive the stewardesses are (because they are gorgeous)

[4.9 EF Futura]

^ basically what i didnt want to say... but i have to agree.

[old_mate]

Qantas slashes 480 jobs

March 09, 2006

QANTAS will cut 480 jobs following the closure of its heavy maintenance operations in Sydney.

The airline said the B747 maintenance operations will close in May and the decision follows a review of all its aircraft engineering operations.

Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon said the airline would retain its wide body heavy jet maintenance facilities in Australia.

But its longer term commitment to the local operations would depend on whether it could generate competitive benefits, he said.

"Retaining three wide body maintenance facilities in Australia is no longer viable under this scenario," he said.

"We have one chance to make this work and we are determined to succeed."

Like airlines around the world, Qantas' margins have been hurt by a rising jet fuel price, which remain around historic highs.

Mr Dixon said that while the Sydney closure would cut 480 jobs from its maintenance workforce, redeployment could reduce the number to around 340 if workers transfer.

The heavy maintenance operations for the 747 fleet will be shifted to the airline's base in Avalon, Victoria.

Mr Dixon said the decision to close the airline's Sydney heavy maintenance base, after more than 55 years of operation, was regretted, but necessary.

"We have severe space limitations at Sydney and the limitations will increase in future years," he said.

"However, workplace efficiencies recently negotiated with the workforce at Avalon will enable us to start immediately to achieve the productive scale necessary to compete with offshore options."

Mr Dixon said Qantas had considered moving the operations overseas but decided restructuring in Australia would deliver the required benefits.

The airline expects to generate savings of around $100 million a year from changes to its engineering operations through consolidation, process improvements and more flexible work rules.

"While moving considerable parts of our business overseas would have provided overall greater savings, the successful restructuring in Australia also had the benefit of significant savings that would make the airline competitive," Mr Dixon said.

He also criticised union officials' claims that shifting jobs offshore could compromise the airline's safety record.

"This is a nonsense and is proven to be by the operational performance of airlines around the world every day," he said.

He said unions should help Qantas achieve the operational flexibility it needed to compete instead of "mouthing emotional slogans".

-Daily Telegraph


Well, not as bad as it could have been. I already feel for some of the blokes that are going to get the chop (myself more than likely included come 12 months)

some key points from above

I was under the impression Virgin's heavy maintenance was done in NZ. Cannot be certain however.

a typical licensed aircraft maintenance engineer gets paid somewhere in the vicinity of 100, 000 depending on number of license types. A non licensed engineer would be earning about the 60k mark

Qantas have typically always had more LAME's than AME's around. This is where a lot of cost can be reduced. In places such as China, you have a certifying engineer who has to supervise and certify the work of other (usually NON SKILLED mind you) workers who have come from who knows where. In australia at least, the workers are skilled

I know of several LAME's that have done contracts in China, KL and Singapore who have seen first hand the shortcuts that happen on a regular basis...some is negligable, others are downright scary

While some good news can be taken out of todays events, i expect it is going to resurface again come the launch of jetstar international and the arrival of both the Airbus A380 and Boeing 787. Time will tell

[chief]

Originally Posted by parawolf

I would stop flying QANTAS in a heartbeat regardless if Singapore Airlines was allowed fair and open competition within Australian airspace, including the AUS <-> USA route.

Flying either QANTAS or United on these ultra profitable routes are just wrong. Singapore Airlines in my opinion cannot be beat for customer service.

I have flown domestic Qantas and got a free beer out of it. Flew Signapore Airlines international in economy to Turkey from Australia and from France back home. Their service is unbeatable. There is more leg room, economy have TV's and can watch movies on demand, and is generally a more pleasent flight.

I will not fly Air France or Turkish Air again.

[Dave_au]

Originally Posted by 4.9 EF Futura

i think the directors are paying themselves $100k + $40k for each committee they sit on. Disgusting - seeing as the directors probably sit on a handful of other boards as well.

Disagree on the disgusting, I think they deserve it, well they should deserve it, if their the best minds in the business.

[4.9 EF Futura]

Originally Posted by Dave_au

Disagree on the disgusting, I think they deserve it, well they should deserve it, if their the best minds in the business.

Guess everyone will have to make your own mind up on that one:

http://www.qantas.com.au/info/about/...ardOfDirectors

IIRC James Packer never even studied business... or anything for that matter... I guess being born into that family makes you one of the best minds in buisness

http://www.qantas.com.au/infodetail/...nualReport.pdf

He attended 8 meetings during the 2005 financial year. For his troubles, he was remunerated $101,920 + $10,080 super + $4,775 travel.

Im all for companies paying what they need to get the best people for the job... but there's line between paying what you need and excess.

[Tote]

Originally Posted by Ringo

I'm not going to be making any friends here with these comments but here goes

If this is what Qantas has to do to ensure long term viability and survival then they should do it. If someone can do something for you cheaper than you can do it yourself its called outsourcing. I work for a company that does exactly that - takes an administrative task from our customers and does it better and cheaper than our customers can do it themselves.

The International Aircraft Maintenance Business in Bangkok and Singapore is massive. They look after Aircraft from national carriers all over the world. There is so many regulations to do with maintenance of aircraft that I would not feel that my safety is threatened is the jet was maintained outside Australia. Virgin get their maintenance done in Bangkok now don't they.....wonder why?

It ИИИИes me off that the Qantas workers are protesting and threatening to strike on the eve of the games. That it blackmail, and dare I say it 'terrorism' of Australia's international reputation just when we are about to have the spotlight placed on us. That is sure acting like our great patriotic International Airline isn't it? I know their Union is to blame....after all the Union has secured such good pay rates for its members that it is making Aircraft Maintenance in Australia un-viable....

Airlines are expensive businesses to run and when things are good they make a lot of money. Airlines are also fickle businesses very sensitive to:

The economy (when no-one has any money, they holiday at home)
Terrorism - When Sept 11 happened it sent Ansett under and many others to the wall - Qantas lost a couple of hundred million.....remember that ?
Fuel costs soaring - there is a cost that Qantas can't control which has cost them money

From the previous post you saying that each Maintenance Engineer is getting paid $100,000 buck a year....the same as EF Futura was saying was 'Disgusting'

15g a year less works out to be $900k a year saving..Your Union has done a great job - no wonder outsourcing is looking cheaper to Management.

All4Ford said it best - I really feel for all the employees who may lose a job, but business is business. Qantas is just another company with shareholders, who expect it to perform as most profitable as it possibly can.

And finally I will still happily fly with Qantas and give them first and last chance but I will not pay a premium over another carrier to do so.....no matter how attractive the stewardesses are (because they are gorgeous)

OK, I'll bite and take you to task over a couple of points.
Paragraph 1, Yes, there are instances where outsourcing is a viable alternative but there are many where it isn't. The Australian government IT outsourcing deals struck in the late nineties being a good example. Many Govt departments are now building their own infrastructure because they found outsourcing too expensive and unweildy.

Paragraph 2 Fair point

Paragraph 3
Yes, the union is using it's power to protect it's members. In non unionised workplaces large corporations do what they think they can get away with to reduce costs and hence lower workers benefits. I doubt that worker's wages are the only reason that Qantas is outsourcing.

Paragraph 4
Qantas can control fuel costs by forward purchasing fuel and adding fuel levies to their tickets which they do. Yes, the airline industry is a difficult one but so is IT (ask EDS ) and manufacturing (ask almost any vehicle builder except Toyota)

Why is $100K a year excessive for someone who potentially has the responsibility for hundreds of lives balancing on the quality of his work. There are plenty of people in the IT industry on $100.00 per hour because their skills are in demand. (and the greatest penalty for their incompetance is an email outage)

I agree that Qantas must do what it's shareholders demand or else sink and that there is a lot of media hysteria surrounding job cuts in any industry.

Ultimately every worker has the responsibility these days to keep their skills relevant to the industry they are in. Change is the only thing thats constant these days and those that aren't aware of the changing skills base in their industry will be caught out.

But Qantas has a lot riding on their reputation as a safe airline and they need to make this outsourcing work because once a corporation looses its skill base it is a VERY long road to get them back again.
Regards,
Tote

[Dave_au]

Originally Posted by 4.9 EF Futura

Im all for companies paying what they need to get the best people for the job... but there's line between paying what you need and excess.

Well you guys vote for them, if you want the best, or most influential people that the respective company can get then you'll have to pay for them. Dont like it, vote them out. Simple.

Originally Posted by 4.9 EF Futura

IIRC James Packer never even studied business... or anything for that matter... I guess being born into that family makes you one of the best minds in buisness

Well he's one of the wealthiest, most influential minds in business in Australia at the moment. I dont think he was a wiz kid, nor was Kerry, but they got the job done.

[4.9 EF Futura]

Originally Posted by Dave_au

Well you guys vote for them, if you want the best, or most influential people that the respective company can get then you'll have to pay for them. Dont like it, vote them out. Simple.

I'm not a shareholder... well, not directly... fair to assume most super funds have an exposure to them...

[Dave_au]

4.9, tried to PM you, your inbox is full.

[ScoopED]

I realise that this thread is centered around the Sydney job cuts, but from what I have heard there is also a 'cloud' hanging over the new 767 hanger in Brisbane. Something about it potentially not being cost effective to run the new hanger.

Mike

[MoreHPformyXR6]

There can be not doubt its a global economy & business has got to move with the times or die a slow painfull death. Do i want hardworking Australian's to loose there positions to out sourcing = no. Do i want hard working Australians to take pay cuts & loose some of there conditions = no. Did i want the current govt to bring in these huge work place reforms = no. Is there anything i can do about = not much. Its sad but as i said its a global economy & will become more so in the future. So i just accept it & get on with things.

[MO]

Do not accept it is a global economy and inevitable....this attitude is part of big corporations propoganda.

It is totally obscene what some CEO's are paid...when you consider that the employees are the ones that make the money for the company....unfortunately the ultimate response from employees is gone....that is every employee resigns...no-one replaces them...what happens to company....gee thats hard to work out.

The point is the Boards of Directors and CEO's are too interested in lining their pockets first and then the share holders and don't give a big fat rats ИИИИ about employees.

Lets face it if you got paid Xmillion for one years work why would you care, your set up for life even if you never work again.

[347_XR8]

i havn;t read any posts but heres my opinion. I hope thyey stick it to them. The goverment has really screwed the aviation industry in this country and continue to.

[MO]

Originally Posted by Lukey_XF

i havn;t read any posts but heres my opinion. I hope thyey stick it to them. The goverment has really screwed the aviation industry in this country and continue to.

Not only the aviation industry..but with the new IR reforms every other one as well and don't think for one minute that the current fed gov is finished screwing the worker yet...look out next election.

And just for the record I did warn of this earlier..when Red El xr was still with us.

Can't be bothered doing a search right now..maybe later.

Solidarity comrades.

[parawolf]

Why is it not a global economy and why is it not inevitable. You have not explained yourself here. I work for a global company, and with falling numbers of mainframe system programmers and system operators, we outsourced to India where we got new blood, skilled and accountable employees and at a lower cost. This improved bottom line, improves shareholder value and makes money for the company by not spending it where it is not required to be spent.

There is no Mainframe in our part of the World, the one for Australia is located in New York City. Global Economy at its best, and yes inevitable because of dwindling skills shortage locally and skills glut internationally.

Yes some CEO's are paid stupid amounts of money, but blame the American's for starting that trend, then coming here to Australia. Whoops Global Economy and Inevitable that it had to follow suit otherwise high quality business leaders would leave Australia in search of more dollars.

I'm not an apologist by any stretch of the imagination - but there are certianly some very justifiable reasons for globalisation and rationalisation.

[MO]

You said it in your statement...global economy equals lower wages and conditions for all 'first world economies...in order to compete wages and conditions have to go to the lowest denominator'

Think about it its about profit at any cost.

Now if this means that Australian workers have to come down to an Asian workers wage...not on. We the unionists fought hard and long and sacrificed our lives for what YOU have now.

So analyse the capitalist propoganda and then tell me you will take a 50% paycut.

[MoreHPformyXR6]

[QUOTE=John McMaster]Do not accept it is a global economy and inevitable....this attitude is part of big corporations propoganda.

Im not asking you to accept its a global economy & inevitable (but it is & the facts speak for themselves).... this attitude is part of big corporations propoganda. (its real its not propoganda its happening on a daily basis)
the post below by another member i couldnt have said it better myself. Outsourceing is real & if we can outsource skilled accounatble employee at a lower cost & increase the bottom line than its very real & will continue. If anyone thinks what i have said i propoganda i welcome your feedback.

Another members post below that is so true/i wish it wasnt but thats not the case
Why is it not a global economy and why is it not inevitable. You have not explained yourself here. I work for a global company, and with falling numbers of mainframe system programmers and system operators, we outsourced to India where we got new blood, skilled and accountable employees and at a lower cost. This improved bottom line, improves shareholder value and makes money for the company by not spending it where it is not required to be spent.