aerohottie
Posts: 702
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:39 am

United Airlines are planning to axe 100 staff in Australia to reduce costs.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=3&ObjectID=10372921

The union sounds a tad unrealistic, don't you think?
What?
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9854
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Thu Mar 16, 2006 1:47 pm

Why don't UA do what NZ and QF do, where NZ check-in and dispatch all QF flights in and out of new zealand and QF check-in and dispatch all NZ flights out of Australia?
 
User avatar
ramprat74
Posts: 1322
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:01 pm

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:51 pm

We have 149 employees in SYD, and 30 in MEL. I wonder how many are former Pan Am?
 
planetime
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Thu Mar 16, 2006 3:33 pm

Any plans on UA as far as the schedule or the number of flight down under? Are they planning on increasing the number of flights or decreasing it?
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3679
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Thu Mar 16, 2006 7:24 pm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 1):
Why don't UA do what NZ and QF do, where NZ check-in and dispatch all QF flights in and out of new zealand and QF check-in and dispatch all NZ flights out of Australia?

Thats a really good idea actually! It works well for NZ and QF. Perhaps competition regulators might have something to say about it since atm its only UA and QF flying AU-US? once AC and VS start doing it though I don't see a problem! transtasman there are other competitors to NZ and QF of course.
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2107
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 1:20 am

Hmm, I wonder if we will see UA back in AKL in the near future with all the handling being undertaken by NZ???
 
tu154
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 1:37 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 1:56 am

I remember pass riding out of SYD not too long ago.....Those ground agents were NASTY to pass riding employees! It was a fight to get FICL when it was only half full, telling all standbys that they did not have to put us in FICL as this was reserved for paying customers and they were doing us a favour! One agent said for the price we were paying we should be in coach! (at UA we pay a fee for our passes.) I told one agent we, as employees, are always offered FICL at a higher price or free if we go on a lower boarding priority...as if I had to explain it to her. She came back with, "we do things differently in SYD." I guess they don't work for the same company the rest of us do.
FIRST ON THE ATLANTIC.....FIRST ON THE PACIFIC.....FIRST IN LATIN AMERICA...FIRST 'ROUND THE WORLD.....PAN AM!!
 
jetfixer
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2000 9:20 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:58 am

Quoting Tu154 (Reply 6):
I remember pass riding out of SYD not too long ago.....Those ground agents were NASTY to pass riding employees! It was a fight to get FICL when it was only half full, telling all standbys that they did not have to put us in FICL as this was reserved for paying customers and they were doing us a favour! One agent said for the price we were paying we should be in coach! (at UA we pay a fee for our passes.) I told one agent we, as employees, are always offered FICL at a higher price or free if we go on a lower boarding priority...as if I had to explain it to her. She came back with, "we do things differently in SYD." I guess they don't work for the same company the rest of us do.

Every United CS agent or Res agent I have had to deal with in Australia has been a complete bitch or a$$hole. You're the 4th or 5th person I have heard who has said the same thing about SYD doing things differently. Everthing you said above is true. I hope ground handling goes to someone else.
 
bennett123
Posts: 7426
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 5:16 am

Not clear if the aircraft was half full or First Class was?.
 
tu154
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 1:37 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 5:33 am

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 8):
Not clear if the aircraft was half full or First Class was?.

FICL was only half full.
FIRST ON THE ATLANTIC.....FIRST ON THE PACIFIC.....FIRST IN LATIN AMERICA...FIRST 'ROUND THE WORLD.....PAN AM!!
 
TinkerBelle
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 7:59 am

"And at that meeting they'll make decisions about whether they will continue to allow United Airlines to fly out of Sydney," he said.

Is this not a little over the top? They cannot prevent UA from flying out of SYD, can they?
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
bennett123
Posts: 7426
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:10 am

If the flight was still then this seems fair, however they could always upgrade once it had closed.

There again, who do you upgrade first, fare paying Business/Economy passengers or Non Rev.

IMO, you upgrade fare paying passengers.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3679
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:30 am

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 5):
Hmm, I wonder if we will see UA back in AKL in the near future with all the handling being undertaken by NZ???

Highly unlikely... basically NZ and UA did a swap, UA pulled out of AKL-LAX and NZ pulled out of SYD-LAX. Both Star Alliance, so NZ looks after AKL-LAX. UA would struggle as NZ has a much better product. (More leg room, better interiors, better IFE, and many would say better service).
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Oz777
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 9:48 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:39 am

Quoting Tu154 (Reply 6):
I remember pass riding out of SYD not too long ago.....Those ground agents were NASTY to pass riding employees!

Trust me – it is not only the staff they used to pull the ‘bitchiness’ stunt on.

One recent event. I am SA Gold elite, and had a Premium Economy seat booked. Spoke to the concierge as I was entering the check-in and he directed me to the F check-in area. The battleaxe behind the counter had apoplexy ‘you are an economy passenger – you are in the wrong queue’. Mentioned quietly to her that as a Star Elite pax I had some entitlements to be greeted with “that’s on Air New Zealand, not United”.

Allocated seat was 57E. One of the worst trips I can recall (acft was full), but with a word in the right ear on return to OZ, it cost UA a FOC J class return SYD-LAX.

So to a certain extent I am ambivalent about the staff losing their jobs, when you consider they have put up with a whole series of issues while UA trundled through Chapter 11. Now that the airline has emerged, it’s “thanks staff for helping us – good bye”…… hardly a good message to send out to the rest of the organization is it.

But in some respects there may now be a bit more respect shown for the passenger, as the CUTE agents at SYD are under contract, and if there is a pattern of complaints about a particular agent, they get the DCM.

OZ777
 
LUFTI5525
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 11:35 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 9:23 am

I REMEMBER TRAVELING TO SYD YEARS AGO. THE AGENT WAS A COMPETE
IDIOT. IF I WERE TO BE OFFERED A FREE TIX, I WOULD NOT GO TO SYD AGAIN. WHY GET THE HASSLE WHEN THE THAIS ARE SO MUCH MORE CORDIAL.
 
mymiles2go
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 4:00 pm

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:37 am

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 12):
Highly unlikely... basically NZ and UA did a swap, UA pulled out of AKL-LAX and NZ pulled out of SYD-LAX. Both Star Alliance, so NZ looks after AKL-LAX. UA would struggle as NZ has a much better product. (More leg room, better interiors, better IFE, and many would say better service).

Actually, more likely than you may realize. The real reason they pulled out of AKL was because of staff costs (very similiar in size actually to the staff just cut at SYD). The only way to get rid of them was to shed the base. Coming back to AKL they could do it much much cheaper - potentially making money on it.
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9854
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 1:46 pm

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 4):
Quoting 777ER (Reply 1):
Why don't UA do what NZ and QF do, where NZ check-in and dispatch all QF flights in and out of new zealand and QF check-in and dispatch all NZ flights out of Australia?

Thats a really good idea actually! It works well for NZ and QF. Perhaps competition regulators might have something to say about it since atm its only UA and QF flying AU-US? once AC and VS start doing it though I don't see a problem! transtasman there are other competitors to NZ and QF of course.

Or how about SQ or AC do the check-in and dispatch etc (thats if they have staff there thou)

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 5):
Hmm, I wonder if we will see UA back in AKL in the near future with all the handling being undertaken by NZ???



Quoting Mymiles2go (Reply 15):
Actually, more likely than you may realize. The real reason they pulled out of AKL was because of staff costs (very similiar in size actually to the staff just cut at SYD). The only way to get rid of them was to shed the base. Coming back to AKL they could do it much much cheaper - potentially making money on it.

I can't see why UA would want to return thou, because NZ now has SFO and LAX on its network, and I don't think NZ would want to gove up its good routes or number of flights. Wasn't another reason UA pulled out cause of poor passenger numbers even thou UA swapped a B744 for a B772?
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 4870
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:37 pm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 16):
. Wasn't another reason UA pulled out cause of poor passenger numbers even thou UA swapped a B744 for a B772?

That wasn't the case, UA were choka out of AKL, they cut it mainly due to them being in Bankrupcy, and then the other things on top of that like 96 staff in AKL for 1 daily flight. And rising fuel prices were a small reason but mainly due to chapter 11.
 
mymiles2go
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 4:00 pm

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:58 am

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 17):
That wasn't the case, UA were choka out of AKL, they cut it mainly due to them being in Bankrupcy, and then the other things on top of that like 96 staff in AKL for 1 daily flight. And rising fuel prices were a small reason but mainly due to chapter 11.

Fuel prices weren't rising as high as now at that time. It was basically staff costs. Roughly 100 people for one flight makes it basically impossible to make it profitable. Ch11 really had nothing per se to do with it, it just gave them an excuse to cut the route. The point of Ch11 is to be able to cut things that cost you money - this particular route with the associated staffing cost them money. Now that they've offloaded that baggage (so to speak), it's plausible they could return. Not at all saying that they will, just saying it makes it plausible.

United doesn't really sit around with competitors (AirNZ is both a partner and a competitor, like all Star Alliance airlines) and discuss who can serve a given route. If United can determine that a given route will be profitible on a long term basis (and more profitable that the route that currently is using the aircraft it would have to pull from), then United will likely serve that route. It's not exactly rocket science.
 
FLYACYYZ
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 12:13 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Sat Mar 18, 2006 5:16 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 16):
Or how about SQ or AC do the check-in and dispatch etc (thats if they have staff there thou)

Might be difficult for AC to do the check-in, as UA does AC's check in at SYD. AC has uniformed & concierge staff overseeing activities, but all ground handling is carried out by UA. I supposed if UA staff are let go, that contract will have to be renegotiated.
Above and Beyond
 
malaysia
Posts: 2615
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 3:26 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Sat Mar 18, 2006 5:43 am

The UA staff are probably not nice in SYD cause they can only fly free on one route.... and thats back to the USA, not anywhere locally. I get the same attitude from NW staff in BKK, they have no where else to go plus no visas to Tokyo or USA. so they get a bit up when handling non-rev pax.
There Are Those Who Believe That There May Yet Be Other Airlines Who Even Now Fight To Survive Beyond The Heavens
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2107
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Mon Mar 20, 2006 5:51 am

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 12):
Highly unlikely... basically NZ and UA did a swap, UA pulled out of AKL-LAX and NZ pulled out of SYD-LAX. Both Star Alliance, so NZ looks after AKL-LAX. UA would struggle as NZ has a much better product. (More leg room, better interiors, better IFE, and many would say better service).

That will all change when UA upgrade their international product. UA to AKL was always a full flight but they struggled with yields, plus they had a ridiculous amount of staff there, it was losing money all the time but things have changed...we'll see.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: United To Axe Aussie Jobs

Mon Mar 20, 2006 6:10 am

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 10):
Is this not a little over the top? They cannot prevent UA from flying out of SYD, can they?

No, they can't

Quoting 777ER (Reply 1):
Why don't UA do what NZ and QF do, where NZ check-in and dispatch all QF flights in and out of new zealand and QF check-in and dispatch all NZ flights out of Australia?

That would not work logistically, certainly not in Los Angeles. Additionally, it wouldn't be an even flight swap.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 12):
Highly unlikely... basically NZ and UA did a swap, UA pulled out of AKL-LAX and NZ pulled out of SYD-LAX. Both Star Alliance, so NZ looks after AKL-LAX. UA would struggle as NZ has a much better product. (More leg room, better interiors, better IFE, and many would say better service).

NZ's non-refurbished aircraft actually have inferior IFE to UA's planes. They don't offer Economy Plus in the same way United does, their mileage benefits aren't as good and they no longer offer a full First.

Quoting Mymiles2go (Reply 15):
Actually, more likely than you may realize. The real reason they pulled out of AKL was because of staff costs (very similiar in size actually to the staff just cut at SYD). The only way to get rid of them was to shed the base. Coming back to AKL they could do it much much cheaper - potentially making money on it.

United could have made the station work if they could have filled a 744 or if they had 656,000 pound 777-200ERs. The problem was that they couldn't take a full load on their 648,000 pound 772ERs
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss