Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Qantas Staff To Strike During December  
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12337 posts, RR: 18
Posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4300 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Qantas International cabin crew have said that they will strike during the busy travel period in December unless the airline backs down on expanding its overseas-based workforce. Last month Qantas announced it would establish a London base for 400 international flight attendants from June 2005. The strike will start on December 17. It is not knowen yet how long the strike will last for.

http://www.ozflight.com.au/

32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineZKSUJ From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 7110 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4224 times:

Ooooooh, sounds bad. I get the idea of an overseas work force, but why not just employ aussies and have all crews based in Oz? After all it is an Aussie airline. Do NZ still have London based crews?

User currently offlineANstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5316 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4202 times:

NZ still have UK based crews. They now actually hire them from the UK.

BA have SYD based crews also...


User currently offlineFLYACYYZ From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 1914 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4121 times:

Believe the NZ London based crews only fly LON-LAX-LON.

Correct me if I'm wrong.



Above and Beyond
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4100 times:

QF cabin staff should perhaps take a look at how far union militancy got the AN cabin staff -- it was a key factor in driving AN into liquidation.

Any strike by QF will only hurt QF unions. With Virgin Blue and EK (among others) providing expanding service to/within Aus, QF is not necessarily needed by the Aussie travelling public.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineTBCITDG From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4085 times:

I heard through the rumor mill that even the QF pilots are opposed to the LHR base.

I do not understand why QF would love to open a base in LHR that would stop crew from flying there. This would have a big impact on cabin crew wages.
Not only that, but why not have 2-3 LHR based crew on every flight, as is currently done with AKL and BKK based crew? Instead of asking crew for feedback as to what would be a great way to incorporate a new base, they have jumped head first into a collision course with crew that are essential to them running a successful operation.
Low crew morale = negative performance on board.
I am not saying that the company should bend over for crew, but all they are asking is for a little give and take.
Crew have so far supported:
The opening of an AKL base
The opening of a BKK base
Crew reduction
Leave without pay
Redundancies

What more does the cashed up Roo want??

100% support for my friends at QF !!




User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 6, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4081 times:

Crew have so far supported:
The opening of an AKL base
The opening of a BKK base
Crew reduction
Leave without pay
Redundancies

What more does the cashed up Roo want??


If QF costs remain higher than Virgin Blue & EK, then more QF FA sacrifices are needed. It's that simple.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineTBCITDG From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4057 times:

Here is a simple idea: Why don't the exec's take a mere 2% wage cut and I am sure that the amount of $$ saved will out number any amount that QF thinks it may save by opening a LHR base!


User currently offlineClassicLover From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4659 posts, RR: 23
Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4021 times:

Sure, give the execs a pay cut, they've been doing a bad job and are overpaid, aren't they?

Qantas will save up to $20 million annually by having a London base. The savings come about from Hotel costs, allowances, and all those kinds of things. This is an operational saving for a company that is looking to save as much money as it can by being efficient in order to be able to compete in the long term with other carriers.

From what I have heard, the offer is for all existing staff to apply to move to London on a 3 year contract, and then go back to being based where they are at present if they wish to go back, or stay on in London.

What is the problem? It's 400 out of thousands of cabin crew and has a tangible saving for the airline. It's not like people are being sacked, or they're opening the base and just hiring 400 new people from the UK.

Can someone explain the "big impact on crew wages" please?

Trent.



I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8471 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4012 times:

QF have cut a lot out of their domestic business, moving it to their LCCs. Now they are trying to take more away on the international side. At some point the powers that be at QF are going to find that they have cut the heart out of the company, leaving it open to a lot of competition. I have no sympathy for QF if there is a strike - just hope that BA can come in and take care of the passengers.

Cutting management salaries 2% sounds like a pretty good idea to me. I fly more miles a year on QF than AA and find that most employees working the planes are pretty good, but every time I have had a reason to have a contact with a (mid level) "manager" I have found them to be village idiots who could not add to the company's profits or customer loyalty if their company car depended on it. QF could probably cut out half of them and not miss a beat.

And no, I am not a union member - just a guy who owns his own little one man business. I'm just the type that believes in taking care of the employees who take care of the customers.


User currently offlineTBCITDG From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days ago) and read 3989 times:

Classiclover:

With the reduction of crew on all aircraft QF have saved a whole lot more than the projected 20 million that they intend to save by opening this new base.
If the LHR base was to go ahead, then think about all the overtime that people will loose out on.Or the time that they spend at home after a long journey like a LHR trip. I think that the crew have done their part of cost cutting. They are competing with the likes of SQ,CX,MH,TG etc etc all who have more crew on board. Yet QF still ranks high! Why, because of who??? CREW!
QF have gone about it the smart way, sure they claim that "no employee will loose their job as a result" but how about the effects this base will have on IT'S employees. Oh I forgot they really don't give a toot!
And as for "it's not like they are hiring 400 UK nationals" Well, from what I hear, the pay that has been offered to the SYD based crew to relocate is appalling. Not only that, they will hardly have any days off (as is the current trend with BKK and AKL crew).But of course, the crying Kangaroo will say "but we offered it to you! And you did not take it. So let us therefore hire 400 CONTRACT, CHEAP LABOUR, crew with dismal conditions!!



User currently offlineTriJetFan1 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1128 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days ago) and read 3986 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Is there any Qantas based American crews?


Earned PPL June 26, 2007
User currently offlineClassicLover From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4659 posts, RR: 23
Reply 12, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days ago) and read 3971 times:

TBCITDG - very interesting  Smile

It'll be interesting to see what happens, because I also heard that Qantas are "prepared for any strike action that may happen". Personally I don't see how they'll keep flights in the air.

Time will tell  Smile

Trent.



I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
User currently offlineKrisworldB777 From Australia, joined Nov 2000, 571 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3938 times:

Yet again Australians get a privileged insight into what can only be described as the sheer ignorance and stupidity of the Australian unions, particularly at Qantas. Time and time again Qantas’ unions have proved that they have little grasp of a globalised marketplace and more latterly the dire state of affairs in the aviation industry that can only be described as frighteningly tumultuous.

As those with half a brain have stated, for Qantas to remain competitive in the marketplace they must, repeat must, reduce their cost base so as to ensure sustainability, particularly with competition from airlines like Singapore Airlines and Emirates which are, at this point in time at least, substantially more efficient than Qantas.

As has been expressed recently in the media, the Singapore Government has publicly stated that for SIA to remain competitive, they must slash approximately $1-billion worth of their fixed costs, particularly in the uncertain climate which currently prevails. Given that SIA’s staff expenditure is substantially lower than Qantas’ at 17.4% and 27.9% respectively, it certainly highlights that Qantas has much work to do and that ignoring such threats would, quite frankly, be a gross demonstration of unmitigated mismanagement that would lead to Qantas being unable to compete at home with Virgin Blue or with other airlines abroad.

It is also important to compare the base salaries of airline cabin crew. Qantas cabin crew are earning substantially superior base salaries to junior crew at British Airways ($23,000) and Emirates ($27,000). For London-based crew, Qantas is offering a base salary of $31,500 accompanied by allowances, sector pay and an annualised lump sum, a package works out to around $62,000 compared with the current salaries which average between $37,000 and $47,000 offered in Australia.

It is also worth noting that Qantas is OFFERING two year contracts to its current Australia-based crew, not simply employing British staff in order to snub Australian counterparts.

Striking at the busy Christmas period only demonstrates what a pack of half wits the Qantas unionists are and that they don’t understand the true nature of the contracts being offered nor what damage it would do to the company. If they want to be making commercial decisions then they should be occupying a role in senior management. Quite frankly, and as has been shown so blatantly, most lack the basic intelligence and commonsense to do so. Given that they are apparently unable to comprehend what is quite a basic concept, I hate to think what would happen to our iconic kangaroo if they were in charge. Undoubtedly it would be akin to our friends at Ansett. Perhaps we need a repeat of the 1989 fiasco which will teach them a lesson.


User currently offlineZKSUJ From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 7110 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3898 times:

Yeah, the NZ LHR based crews only fly to LAX andf back.

User currently offlineNickofatlanta From Australia, joined May 2000, 1488 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3888 times:

An argument could also be made that since QF is opening new fifth freedom routes out of LHR, it is only fair that some of the FAs be based in the UK. HKG is a new LHR route starting soon as are more SIN flights and Shanghai is also on the radar screen.

Additionally, many major international airlines have bases overseas. For example, UA has bases in LHR, NRT and other international locations. Global airlines that have international transit hubs like UA (NRT), NW (NRT) and QF (SIN) really need to have FA bases abroad.


User currently offlineANstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5316 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3874 times:

Perhaps if the unions were more flexible we would see QF operate a real hub at SIN with more EU flights. unitl overseas employment restrictions are changed we wont see that.

User currently offlineAussie747 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3863 times:

My sentiments exactly KrisworldB777, It is simply that kind of attitude in the western world and arrogance of unions that only serve to put Australian workers as being 'inflexbible and lazy'.

The civil aviation industry in Australia along with the public service are the last bastions of this archaic dinosaur working regimes left. The sooner this rot is broken the better.

Down time in strikes in Australia throughout the years has cost this country billions of dollars.

The mere threat of a strike over this time to Qantas will only serve to hinder the airlines reputaion and ultimately the percetion of the flying public. This vicious circle is only going to place their own jobs at risk down the line, and with "21 other competing fish in the sea" on the kangaroo route the is plenty of other alternatives to get to the UK.

Loyalty to Qantas will only go so far and blind freddy can see that. Qantas share of international traffic has plumetted from 46% in the mid 1990's now to only 31.4%.

I only leave this with one question. I wonder why??

N.B. Qantas workers and unions just take a good long hard look at yourselves. The rest of the world is adaptable to all changes, just grow up and accept it.







User currently offlineAJ From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 2397 posts, RR: 25
Reply 18, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3855 times:

"N.B. Qantas workers and unions just take a good long hard look at yourselves. The rest of the world is adaptable to all changes, just grow up and accept it."

This is one union involved in this situation, don't lump all Qantas unions into it. It is the FAAA's battle.


User currently offlineAirNewZealand From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 2544 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3831 times:

Hey Guys,
As A flight Attendant based in AKL for Qantas i shall state my comments...

I do think Aussie crews are being abit uneasy about this whole 'moving off shore bases!!
AKL now has around 380 crew, and is continuing to grow.
We start off on significantly lower pay, no staff travel benefits (Though currently getting worked on), and have alot shorter slip ports than our other workers- yet we do the same thing!
My point is, is that QF unions have taken this too far. We do the same job as them, and we still love it- yet We dont complain!!!
Yes agreed, 400 positions off-shore is alot, but what you guys might not realise is that they will be Australian Crews, not English! They enter in on their same seneority, are employed directly thru QANTAS, and get the exact same benefits as Qantas crew in Aussie get...
All QF are trying to do is create a sense of well being for the future- so if anything goes wrong they donot need to make redundent AUSTRALIAN crews- Addecco crews in NZ and Thailand will not be made redundant as we are saving the company money - the same can be said for MAM casuals who are based in short haul in Aussie and some on International!!!

On another note, alot of crews are not going to strike- as they actually lke the idea! So im sure flights will resume on time- with NZ crews, Thai crews, short haul Qantas crews, MAM crews and the non union crew members not striking!!

Have a great day guys, and i will see you onboard!!!

Mikey


User currently offlineSafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3816 times:

Last month Qantas announced it would establish a London base for 400 international flight attendants from June 2005.
I would have expected a base in LAX, considering all of the flights that they have.

 Smile
-Will



"She Flew For What We Stand For"
User currently offlineAceFreighter From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 179 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3801 times:

Just for the record, BA do not have any pilots or cabin crew based in Sydney.

They do have cabin crew bases in HKG, Japan, India, S America, Middle East but not Oz.


User currently offlineAirNewZealand From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 2544 posts, RR: 6
Reply 22, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3797 times:

RE SAFETYDUDE...

LAX base is planning to be opened within 2-3 years... Right now on the 747-400 we have 3-4 NZ cabin Crew and the rest Aussie based crew!

Cheers
Mikey


User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1066 posts, RR: 33
Reply 23, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3781 times:

Nothing like bit of Union bashing is there guys.
ChrisworldB777
"Perhaps we need a repeat of the 1989 fiasco which will teach them a lesson".
Just what we need another repeat of the most blatant overabuse of government power seen in Australia's history.
If your age is accurate you have no idea what you are talking about.
The number of lives,careers,families destoyed in that dispute would leave no-one ever wishing it upon your worst enemy.
The 89 dispute is an everpresent feature today of aviation in Australia having derailed many careers and still has many open wounds which are visible to all who work in the industry.Do you??

Aussie747
Qantas workers and unions just take a good long hard look at yourselves. The rest of the world is adaptable to all changes, just grow up and accept it.

Sorry mate but standing up for both your rights and work conditions is a fundamental principle in the western world(well everywhere except under a Howard government).
It seems adaptable means poorer conditions,greater work hours and less entitlements.
Mmm fair deal,yea right?
Given Qantas is heading for its second record profit in a row in the worst aviation environment ever you really have to ask what more do management want?
Darren



2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently offlineKrisworldB777 From Australia, joined Nov 2000, 571 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (10 years 5 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3768 times:

Dehowie:

There’s nothing quite like a pilot trying to grasp basic commercial principles and the notion of competition.

In the 1989 dispute, it is important to consider that it basically brought the whole country to a standstill and had the potential to severely jeopardise the economy. The government had every right to intervene in that matter to protect the interests of all Australians – that is what a government mandate is for.

It is also worth you considering the number of lives, careers and families that were destroyed with the collapse of Ansett after the unions got their way and forced staff expenditure to levels so very unsustainable.


25 Post contains images SafetyDude : LAX base is planning to be opened within 2-3 years... Right now on the 747-400 we have 3-4 NZ cabin Crew and the rest Aussie based crew! There we go!
26 TBCITDG : Who here is talking about Ansett?? Who here said anything about rejecting the whole LHR base altogether? Had the management team at QF spoken to ITS s
27 ClassicLover : From what you say TBCITDG, the crew are just having a whinge about not being able to go to London anymore. I can see why that would annoy them. Either
28 Miami1 : AIRNEWZEALAND Hi mikey. cant wait too see you onboard either with your attitude. Are you a NZ wanna be who never got in ? and for a start you knew exa
29 TBCITDG : I am sure that crew are not having a whinge simply because they will no longer be able to fly to LHR. I am sure the crew would have rather complained
30 ANstar : Hmmm, makes you wonder if QF crew will ever be happy. You are one of the highest paid in the industry. If you DONT like it, leave or go to another car
31 Aussie747 : If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen. There are plenty of other jobs even within the travel service industry. I have been working in serv
32 Post contains images Marara : Hey Mikey, I would have another look at the conditions for the LHR base if I were you. Not as rosy as the picture you paint. You will prob find there
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Qantas Crew To Strike This Xmas? posted Mon Sep 6 2004 23:46:24 by CXoneWorld
United Ground Staff To Strike At LHR posted Thu Aug 19 2004 16:36:56 by 7LBAC111
British Airways Staff To Strike posted Sat Aug 14 2004 13:36:56 by 777ER
BAA Airport Staff To Strike (probably). But When? posted Thu Nov 7 2002 22:54:01 by Ikarus
Staff At STN To Strike Over Bank Holiday posted Fri Aug 18 2006 14:08:18 by BananaBoY
Northwest Pledges To Fly During Strike posted Tue Jun 28 2005 02:45:52 by KarlB737
Not Again! AI Staff To Go On Strike posted Sun Nov 16 2003 05:27:19 by Indianguy
Qantas Plans To Sack 2.5k Workers Shock Staff posted Wed Feb 19 2003 12:23:58 by Singapore_Air
Qantas Staff Strike Today posted Fri Aug 2 2002 08:46:24 by Singapore_Air
Qantas Workers To Continue Strike Action posted Sun Dec 2 2001 06:48:19 by United Airline