EK413 wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

This is a PR nightmare, but the traveling public have a short memory. Not that different to the mass disruptions when the fleet was grounded by AJ years back. However it will be interesting to see how QF recover their reputation - they will need to spend big on customer experience, and brand reinvention.

Interesting BA (who are not outsourced) are also facing similar challenges- they claim the staff shortages are due to slow security vetting for staff access passes. No one else would have had to ramp up like QF. I wonder if that’s an issue in AU too, having visitor passes on the ramp is a nightmare, with an escort requiring line of sight eye contact at all times. My ASIC passes took 4 weeks one year….

https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2022 ... oExRdJPK4Q

I feel very sorry for the poor bastards on the frontline left to mop up the mess of these missing bags an irate customers - certainly won’t help their staff retention either!

Hopefully for everyone we see this clear up now the peaks of Easter and holidays are over!

The problems with outsourcing isn’t just the problem, QF don’t have a say anymore as to when they’d like to operate their services, it’s the 3rd parties call as they determine when they’ll have resources available. Theres also their terrible work ethic and conditions compounded with practices such as split shifts, & if I was asked to work split shifts I would ask the boss to go jump.

The advantages of having your own ground handling resources is controlling when to have resources available, and incentives which come with it encouraging staff to stay on long term and loyal, Menzies, Dnata & Swissport have zero to no perks or incentives whatsoever…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Prior to covid these ground handlers were operating very successfully across Australia. QF was also a GHA to internationals. Let’s not be cruel - the staff working for these outsourced outfits are inexperienced- they don’t have poor work ethic, they are just short staffed, they work just as hard as any other employee. I fully agree they deserve better conditions and better pay is the only way to overcome the inability to attract staff, and balance our resourcing. But let’s not vilify the individuals working for these organisations, they are the ones showing up to work amongst this mess.

JQ are 100% outsourced by these same providers, and so are VA in many key ports- they aren’t facing these same melt downs. The issue is the ramp up, and attracting staff, QF scheduled against demand not their operational ability to deliver- they got greedy. As I’ve said before (and the BA example) carriers themselves can’t get staff in the door- border closures have crippled the industry. The world is short staffed, and we need to pay more at entry level to get people into many of theses positions.

Melbourne Airport CEO Lyell Strambi stepping down at the end of June. Lorie Argus to be the replacement....

https://www.theage.com.au/national/elec ... m4d#p53m4d

smi0006 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

This is a PR nightmare, but the traveling public have a short memory. Not that different to the mass disruptions when the fleet was grounded by AJ years back. However it will be interesting to see how QF recover their reputation - they will need to spend big on customer experience, and brand reinvention.

Interesting BA (who are not outsourced) are also facing similar challenges- they claim the staff shortages are due to slow security vetting for staff access passes. No one else would have had to ramp up like QF. I wonder if that’s an issue in AU too, having visitor passes on the ramp is a nightmare, with an escort requiring line of sight eye contact at all times. My ASIC passes took 4 weeks one year….

https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2022 ... oExRdJPK4Q

I feel very sorry for the poor bastards on the frontline left to mop up the mess of these missing bags an irate customers - certainly won’t help their staff retention either!

Hopefully for everyone we see this clear up now the peaks of Easter and holidays are over!

The problems with outsourcing isn’t just the problem, QF don’t have a say anymore as to when they’d like to operate their services, it’s the 3rd parties call as they determine when they’ll have resources available. Theres also their terrible work ethic and conditions compounded with practices such as split shifts, & if I was asked to work split shifts I would ask the boss to go jump.

The advantages of having your own ground handling resources is controlling when to have resources available, and incentives which come with it encouraging staff to stay on long term and loyal, Menzies, Dnata & Swissport have zero to no perks or incentives whatsoever…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Prior to covid these ground handlers were operating very successfully across Australia. QF was also a GHA to internationals. Let’s not be cruel - the staff working for these outsourced outfits are inexperienced- they don’t have poor work ethic, they are just short staffed, they work just as hard as any other employee. I fully agree they deserve better conditions and better pay is the only way to overcome the inability to attract staff, and balance our resourcing. But let’s not vilify the individuals working for these organisations, they are the ones showing up to work amongst this mess.

JQ are 100% outsourced by these same providers, and so are VA in many key ports- they aren’t facing these same melt downs. The issue is the ramp up, and attracting staff, QF scheduled against demand not their operational ability to deliver- they got greedy. As I’ve said before (and the BA example) carriers themselves can’t get staff in the door- border closures have crippled the industry. The world is short staffed, and we need to pay more at entry level to get people into many of theses positions.

I must agree work ethics probably is too harsh, and more to do with their lack of experience.
We’ve seen numerous incidents occur on the ramp which most likely could’ve been prevented.

I’m certain VA ground handling is in house as they recently rehired with a renewed EBA signed off most likely due to unions feeing threatened by QFs move to outsourcing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

EK413 wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

The problems with outsourcing isn’t just the problem, QF don’t have a say anymore as to when they’d like to operate their services, it’s the 3rd parties call as they determine when they’ll have resources available. Theres also their terrible work ethic and conditions compounded with practices such as split shifts, & if I was asked to work split shifts I would ask the boss to go jump.

The advantages of having your own ground handling resources is controlling when to have resources available, and incentives which come with it encouraging staff to stay on long term and loyal, Menzies, Dnata & Swissport have zero to no perks or incentives whatsoever…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Prior to covid these ground handlers were operating very successfully across Australia. QF was also a GHA to internationals. Let’s not be cruel - the staff working for these outsourced outfits are inexperienced- they don’t have poor work ethic, they are just short staffed, they work just as hard as any other employee. I fully agree they deserve better conditions and better pay is the only way to overcome the inability to attract staff, and balance our resourcing. But let’s not vilify the individuals working for these organisations, they are the ones showing up to work amongst this mess.

JQ are 100% outsourced by these same providers, and so are VA in many key ports- they aren’t facing these same melt downs. The issue is the ramp up, and attracting staff, QF scheduled against demand not their operational ability to deliver- they got greedy. As I’ve said before (and the BA example) carriers themselves can’t get staff in the door- border closures have crippled the industry. The world is short staffed, and we need to pay more at entry level to get people into many of theses positions.

I must agree work ethics probably is too harsh, and more to do with their lack of experience.
We’ve seen numerous incidents occur on the ramp which most likely could’ve been prevented.

I’m certain VA ground handling is in house as they recently rehired with a renewed EBA signed off most likely due to unions feeing threatened by QFs move to outsourcing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe VA use their own ground staff in major capital city ports but outsource in regional centres as you would expect given the volumes of flights involved.

tullamarine wrote:

EK413 wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

Prior to covid these ground handlers were operating very successfully across Australia. QF was also a GHA to internationals. Let’s not be cruel - the staff working for these outsourced outfits are inexperienced- they don’t have poor work ethic, they are just short staffed, they work just as hard as any other employee. I fully agree they deserve better conditions and better pay is the only way to overcome the inability to attract staff, and balance our resourcing. But let’s not vilify the individuals working for these organisations, they are the ones showing up to work amongst this mess.

JQ are 100% outsourced by these same providers, and so are VA in many key ports- they aren’t facing these same melt downs. The issue is the ramp up, and attracting staff, QF scheduled against demand not their operational ability to deliver- they got greedy. As I’ve said before (and the BA example) carriers themselves can’t get staff in the door- border closures have crippled the industry. The world is short staffed, and we need to pay more at entry level to get people into many of theses positions.

I must agree work ethics probably is too harsh, and more to do with their lack of experience.
We’ve seen numerous incidents occur on the ramp which most likely could’ve been prevented.

I’m certain VA ground handling is in house as they recently rehired with a renewed EBA signed off most likely due to unions feeing threatened by QFs move to outsourcing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe VA use their own ground staff in major capital city ports but outsource in regional centres as you would expect given the volumes of flights involved.

VA have their own ground crews in BNE, SYD and MEL, everywhere else is outsourced

My ASIC took eight weeks to get sent out to me. Then as above mentioned, carrying someone with a visitor pass is an absolute nightmare because not only do you have to have an eye on them constantly, you are also trying to teach them whilst getting the job done yourself.

I still argue against blaming a lot of problems on outsourcing because QF had the majority of their ports run by outsourced companies prior to COVID and it was only the last ten that were outsourced in the middle of the pandemic. QF and other airlines also audit and train the staff on a frequent basis to ensure compliance is met.

Major companies like Swissport and Dnata are no slouches as they have been in the business for decades across many airlines around the world, although I understand their loadings, incentive to work etc is not as good as the smaller ground handling companies in Australia.

At the end of the day this will blow over. The past few years has been a ridiculous series of events and will just be another learning curve for everyone. No one could predict airlines were going to be holding on for dear life when COVID hit, and then for travel to resume with significantly less staff due to mandates and sickness with holiday periods and everyone wanting to travel - of course it was going to be a mess.

EK413 wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

This is a PR nightmare, but the traveling public have a short memory. Not that different to the mass disruptions when the fleet was grounded by AJ years back. However it will be interesting to see how QF recover their reputation - they will need to spend big on customer experience, and brand reinvention.

Interesting BA (who are not outsourced) are also facing similar challenges- they claim the staff shortages are due to slow security vetting for staff access passes. No one else would have had to ramp up like QF. I wonder if that’s an issue in AU too, having visitor passes on the ramp is a nightmare, with an escort requiring line of sight eye contact at all times. My ASIC passes took 4 weeks one year….

https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2022 ... oExRdJPK4Q

I feel very sorry for the poor bastards on the frontline left to mop up the mess of these missing bags an irate customers - certainly won’t help their staff retention either!

Hopefully for everyone we see this clear up now the peaks of Easter and holidays are over!

The problems with outsourcing isn’t just the problem, QF don’t have a say anymore as to when they’d like to operate their services, it’s the 3rd parties call as they determine when they’ll have resources available. Theres also their terrible work ethic and conditions compounded with practices such as split shifts, & if I was asked to work split shifts I would ask the boss to go jump.

The advantages of having your own ground handling resources is controlling when to have resources available, and incentives which come with it encouraging staff to stay on long term and loyal, Menzies, Dnata & Swissport have zero to no perks or incentives whatsoever…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I take it you’ve never had to deal with a major out sourcing/labour hire group ? Most of these companies are extremely professional at what they do, but at the same token they are ruthless. The place I work at the actual number of full time workers is about 25%, the rest are casuals, they pay quite well by the hour, but of course that comes without the benefits of full time employment.

If the client wants staff at 4am on Sunday morning, they will get them. Want 50 today, but only 30 tomorrow, then 90 the day after, no problem, the agency simply sends a txt to who they choose and they show up. Don’t show up and the chances of getting the txt the next time round are very low.

For these companies like Dnata, Swissport, etc, the customer is king, they get what they want. The problem will be if the customer isn’t prepared to pay the market rate for staff, then you get a lower standard of staff, it’s the same in every industry. To say that outsourcing is a problem on its own and that those companies won’t provide a service when the customer needs it are wrong. The level of service provided will of course be relevant to the value of the contract, you may need 5 ground handlers to turn around a 737 on 30 mins, but if the customer is only prepared to pay for 4, then the outsourcing agent isn’t going to pay for the 5th person themselves, the customer can deal with that. however they want, as long as you do your best to do a turnaround as quickly as possible, with what you’ve got, then it’s the customers problem for basically being cheap. They do have to communicate these problems though, or the agent will get blamed.

I don’t know who has the QF handling contract now, but obviously there are problems, will they get fixed, most likely, will they get fixed to prior QF standards, or what is expected by the people on this site, probably not.

LTEN11 wrote:

I take it you’ve never had to deal with a major out sourcing/labour hire group ? Most of these companies are extremely professional at what they do, but at the same token they are ruthless. The place I work at the actual number of full time workers is about 25%, the rest are casuals, they pay quite well by the hour, but of course that comes without the benefits of full time employment.

If the client wants staff at 4am on Sunday morning, they will get them. Want 50 today, but only 30 tomorrow, then 90 the day after, no problem, the agency simply sends a txt to who they choose and they show up. Don’t show up and the chances of getting the txt the next time round are very low.

For these companies like Dnata, Swissport, etc, the customer is king, they get what they want. The problem will be if the customer isn’t prepared to pay the market rate for staff, then you get a lower standard of staff, it’s the same in every industry. To say that outsourcing is a problem on its own and that those companies won’t provide a service when the customer needs it are wrong. The level of service provided will of course be relevant to the value of the contract, you may need 5 ground handlers to turn around a 737 on 30 mins, but if the customer is only prepared to pay for 4, then the outsourcing agent isn’t going to pay for the 5th person themselves, the customer can deal with that. however they want, as long as you do your best to do a turnaround as quickly as possible, with what you’ve got, then it’s the customers problem for basically being cheap. They do have to communicate these problems though, or the agent will get blamed.

I don’t know who has the QF handling contract now, but obviously there are problems, will they get fixed, most likely, will they get fixed to prior QF standards, or what is expected by the people on this site, probably not.

Agreed. You can outsource the responsibility for the works but not the accountability for those works! Having worked in the outsourcing of works for many years, the ones that fail are typically where the company outsourcing the work, (a) fail to effectively manage the vendor or (b) want something different to what they are paying for / have agreed too which can result in labour or service shortfalls. The focus in this forum should all be on the outsourcer, not the 'outsourcee'

According to reports in 9 Media, a small number of QF long haul flights on the A330 including Brisbane-Los Angeles is currently staffed by NZ (Jetconnect?) crew.

https://www.9news.com.au/national/cabin ... b8f4c7f511

SCFlyer wrote:

According to reports in 9 Media, a small number of QF long haul flights on the A330 including Brisbane-Los Angeles is currently staffed by NZ (Jetconnect?) crew.

https://www.9news.com.au/national/cabin ... b8f4c7f511

I flew SYD-SIN on QF A332 earlier this week. A number of the crew were obviously New Zealanders. I don't know if that meant they were Jetconnect or just New Zealanders who now live in Australia.

SCFlyer wrote:

According to reports in 9 Media, a small number of QF long haul flights on the A330 including Brisbane-Los Angeles is currently staffed by NZ (Jetconnect?) crew.

This is nothing new, Jetconnect has crewed A330 flights ex-Australia (and domestically within Australia for that matter, I believe) for many years.

tullamarine wrote:

SCFlyer wrote:

According to reports in 9 Media, a small number of QF long haul flights on the A330 including Brisbane-Los Angeles is currently staffed by NZ (Jetconnect?) crew.

https://www.9news.com.au/national/cabin ... b8f4c7f511

I flew SYD-SIN on QF A332 earlier this week. A number of the crew were obviously New Zealanders. I don't know if that meant they were Jetconnect or just New Zealanders who now live in Australia.

Likely JetConnect crew, as has been happening for years on the long-haul fleet. Often you will see crew during boarding who's ID badge will have NZL on it rather than AUS.

If you search JETCONNECT LIMITED approx. 700 crew were kept on the New Zealand payroll over the pandemic, which the New Zealand government help cover there wages.
If you search QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED another 150 staff were kept on the payroll in New Zealand under Qantas.
https://services.workandincome.govt.nz/eps/search

Also re the Jetconnect crew, from what understood in the past they used to be trained across the 737s, 787s, a330s and a380s.

We’re as the standard mainline based crew only are trained to operate on an single type.

Is that still the case?

I could see the New Zealand based crews agreement being a lot more appealing to Qantas, with the type flexibility in there contracts.

Speaking of foreign crews, this popped up on my Twitter feed this afternoon supposedly showing the expert designed crew rest facility developed for the A332s doing the longer range flights such as BNE-LAX. https://twitter.com/ietsystems/status/1516532525178703876. If true, it is not exactly state of the art and I can see why QF might have wanted to use non-Australian crews to avoid tanglingling with the FA union.

tullamarine wrote:

Speaking of foreign crews, this popped up on my Twitter feed this afternoon supposedly showing the expert designed crew rest facility developed for the A332s doing the longer range flights such as BNE-LAX. https://twitter.com/ietsystems/status/1516532525178703876. If true, it is not exactly state of the art and I can see why QF might have wanted to use non-Australian crews to avoid tanglingling with the FA union.

Any reason why QF doesnt use the lower deck mobile crew rest module on the A330 that other carriers have been using for many years?

Presumably cost to install, and these aircraft have historically mostly flown domestic or shorter international routes.

While it's not a private cubby, it's quite possibly more room for the crew.

It's seemingly got some press as the Australian unions rejected it, so QF has been staffing the flights with the NZ Jetconnect crew who operate under different agreements.

[photoid][/photoid]

moa999 wrote:

Presumably cost to install, and these aircraft have historically mostly flown domestic or shorter international routes.

While it's not a private cubby, it's quite possibly more room for the crew.

It's seemingly got some press as the Australian unions rejected it, so QF has been staffing the flights with the NZ Jetconnect crew who operate under different agreements.

I mean those blankets and the cabin lighting not dimming does sound shocking. Surprised they were forced to fly. Even as a pax - bright lights would drive me mad!

Perhaps lower crew rest is also too heavy? Wonder how long we’ll see 330s stretched this far. Surely can’t be a long term solution.

Updates to include links with article, and permanent curtains. The blankets in the twitter pic were due to COVID shipping delays and cabin lighting that would not dim due to engineering.

https://australianaviation.com.au/2022/ ... assengers/

I’m confused. The blankets over rows of seats in the otherwise open rear cabin is the official Qantas crew rest set up? It looks terribly messy and unprofessional. From a brand management point of view I’m extremely surprised that was green lit.

a320fan wrote:

I’m confused. The blankets over rows of seats in the otherwise open rear cabin is the official Qantas crew rest set up? It looks terribly messy and unprofessional. From a brand management point of view I’m extremely surprised that was green lit.

Sorry updated my post. This was only due to COVId shipping delayed, article has an image of the final option. Crew used blankets as the cabin lights wouldn’t dim to to malfunction- still shocking PR…. QF got to work on the details.

Some more info here on the blankets and lack of curtain
https://australianaviation.com.au/2022/ ... assengers/

smi0006 wrote:

Perhaps lower crew rest is also too heavy? Wonder how long we’ll see 330s stretched this far. Surely can’t be a long term solution.

It will last for as long as it takes for them to get more widebody capacity flying - be that JQ 788 freed up by the arrival of A321LRs, additional 789s beyond the existing order...or A350s from 2024-25.

Managing any challenges on BNE-LAX are worth it for the revenue/profit putting a 789 on a new route will generate.

It’s going to be painful for a while.

The pressure to earn money and save money was there before COVID. Now the pressure is off the charts. Every aircraft will be flown as hard as it can to bring in the dollars until it starts causing major problems with bookings.

Right now there is so much pent up demand they can frankly charge what they want and deliver as little as they can and people will pay for it.

It will eventually sort itself out.

In the meantime… travel light and leave lots of padding in your itinerary!

Oh and maybe pack some snacks for the long flights just in case.

Spotted on Sunday at Sydney an all white B77F - operating as Emirates Skycargo to Manila. Does anyone have any idea why this is all white, and not in standard EK colours?
https://flic.kr/p/2nfC94b

moa999 wrote:

Presumably cost to install, and these aircraft have historically mostly flown domestic or shorter international routes.

While it's not a private cubby, it's quite possibly more room for the crew.

It's seemingly got some press as the Australian unions rejected it, so QF has been staffing the flights with the NZ Jetconnect crew who operate under different agreements.

The bar for rights of New Zealand based crew is much lower, and NZ is just as bad. The 763’s flew 12hr flights for years without flat beds for the cabin crew, and they got away with.

Having to use a row of seats isn’t that bad, spear a though for the crew that operate AKL-ADL-AKL on a a321N that is close to a 12hr day.

zkncj wrote:

moa999 wrote:

Presumably cost to install, and these aircraft have historically mostly flown domestic or shorter international routes.

While it's not a private cubby, it's quite possibly more room for the crew.

It's seemingly got some press as the Australian unions rejected it, so QF has been staffing the flights with the NZ Jetconnect crew who operate under different agreements.

The bar for rights of New Zealand based crew is much lower, and NZ is just as bad. The 763’s flew 12hr flights for years without flat beds for the cabin crew, and they got away with.

Having to use a row of seats isn’t that bad, spear a though for the crew that operate AKL-ADL-AKL on a a321N that is close to a 12hr day.

It’s not as bad as it sounds. If you’ve got a good crew and work well together, then it’s actually OK.

Etihad's SYD-AUH service moving from a Boeing 787 to a Boeing 777 from late May, according to aeroroutes.com, and "selected dates may see 3-class 328-seater 777 operating instead of 2-class, however First Class Cabin is not available for booking."

https://aeroroutes.com/eng/220419-eysyd

Another good sign that demand is increasing. A friend was on SYD-AUH at the start of April and says it was absolutely full, he said the crew reckon every SYD flight has extremely high loads these days.

CraigAnderson wrote:

Etihad's SYD-AUH service moving from a Boeing 787 to a Boeing 777 from late May, according to aeroroutes.com, and "selected dates may see 3-class 328-seater 777 operating instead of 2-class, however First Class Cabin is not available for booking."

https://aeroroutes.com/eng/220419-eysyd

Another good sign that demand is increasing. A friend was on SYD-AUH at the start of April and says it was absolutely full, he said the crew reckon every SYD flight has extremely high loads these days.

EK, EY and QR are going out chockers from MEL too. You should see the line for check in every night!

I think AJ may need a holiday. Yet again, he appears to be blaming travellers for the woes suffered by QF over Easter. He now says passengers checking in early, as they were asked to, meant that the baggage systems became overloaded with unprocessed luggage.

The hike in numbers over Easter was not a surprise; most bookings would have been in the system 6-8 weeks ago. It seems to be a failing in management planning by QF that led to the problems rather than passengers. Even yesterday, there were reports of announcements in the arrivals hall that baggage was delayed as ground staff were only just arriving at the plane 1 hour after it landed.

VA and JQ had issues too over Easter but nothing compared to the meltdown that seems to have afflicted the supposed "premium" carrier.

New QFLink route Albury-Adelaide seasonal, interesting add and nice to see more regional connectivity -

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -take-off/

tullamarine wrote:

I think AJ may need a holiday. Yet again, he appears to be blaming travellers for the woes suffered by QF over Easter. He now says passengers checking in early, as they were asked to, meant that the baggage systems became overloaded with unprocessed luggage.

The hike in numbers over Easter was not a surprise; most bookings would have been in the system 6-8 weeks ago. It seems to be a failing in management planning by QF that led to the problems rather than passengers. Even yesterday, there were reports of announcements in the arrivals hall that baggage was delayed as ground staff were only just arriving at the plane 1 hour after it landed.

VA and JQ had issues too over Easter but nothing compared to the meltdown that seems to have afflicted the supposed "premium" carrier.

Indeed, I'd love to know how many equivalent employees are contracted for ground services now and prior to being outsourced, i suspect its alot less.

smi0006 wrote:

New QFLink route Albury-Adelaide seasonal, interesting add and nice to see more regional connectivity -

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -take-off/

Yes, good to see more connecting of the dots across the country!

tullamarine wrote:

The hike in numbers over Easter was not a surprise; most bookings would have been in the system 6-8 weeks ago. It seems to be a failing in management planning by QF that led to the problems rather than passengers. Even yesterday, there were reports of announcements in the arrivals hall that baggage was delayed as ground staff were only just arriving at the plane 1 hour after it landed.

Agreed, it's hard to think this was not a misery of Qantas' own making. The airline may not have known or fully appreciated how 'close contact' isolation rules would impact airport operations, and maybe could not have fully foreseen the easter holidays sh*tshow, but most of this seems to come down to a combination of outsourcing of baggage handling and simply poor forecasting and management.

CraigAnderson wrote:

tullamarine wrote:

The hike in numbers over Easter was not a surprise; most bookings would have been in the system 6-8 weeks ago. It seems to be a failing in management planning by QF that led to the problems rather than passengers. Even yesterday, there were reports of announcements in the arrivals hall that baggage was delayed as ground staff were only just arriving at the plane 1 hour after it landed.

Agreed, it's hard to think this was not a misery of Qantas' own making. The airline may not have known or fully appreciated how 'close contact' isolation rules would impact airport operations, and maybe could not have fully foreseen the easter holidays sh*tshow, but most of this seems to come down to a combination of outsourcing of baggage handling and simply poor forecasting and management.

AJ should have just taken the hit on this - telling everyone that with a perfect storm, QF just didn't perform, and they need to do better. Instead, he (and SYD airport) went on the attack and blamed everyone else, including their customers....mostly the customers.....which goes against all crisis management & PR training they would have had.

jrfspa320 wrote:

tullamarine wrote:

I think AJ may need a holiday. Yet again, he appears to be blaming travellers for the woes suffered by QF over Easter. He now says passengers checking in early, as they were asked to, meant that the baggage systems became overloaded with unprocessed luggage.

The hike in numbers over Easter was not a surprise; most bookings would have been in the system 6-8 weeks ago. It seems to be a failing in management planning by QF that led to the problems rather than passengers. Even yesterday, there were reports of announcements in the arrivals hall that baggage was delayed as ground staff were only just arriving at the plane 1 hour after it landed.

VA and JQ had issues too over Easter but nothing compared to the meltdown that seems to have afflicted the supposed "premium" carrier.

Indeed, I'd love to know how many equivalent employees are contracted for ground services now and prior to being outsourced, i suspect its alot less.

Not sure if it true, but I heard that, when in-house, QF scheduled 5 staff to ground handle a 737 turnaround but under Swissport, the figure is 4 staff. 1 staff member doesn't sound much but a 20% reduction sure does.

smi0006 wrote:

New QFLink route Albury-Adelaide seasonal, interesting add and nice to see more regional connectivity -

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -take-off/

And again, another route that REX could have done that would be consistent with the regional strategy that it has built, instead of pursuing a vanity intercity project...

QF is really beating Rex at its own game it seems.

smi0006 wrote:

New QFLink route Albury-Adelaide seasonal, interesting add and nice to see more regional connectivity -

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -take-off/

Out of interest, is this route driven by passenger demand, or just a good sales pitch for what is essentially a way of swapping Dash8’s between SA and the east coast?

Obzerva wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

New QFLink route Albury-Adelaide seasonal, interesting add and nice to see more regional connectivity -

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -take-off/

Out of interest, is this route driven by passenger demand, or just a good sales pitch for what is essentially a way of swapping Dash8’s between SA and the east coast?

There must be at least some demand, otherwise it would have made more sense to reinstate the once-weekly ADL-CBR Dash 8 flight which operated for several years before the pandemic. That said, there could be some local council or tourism body funding to sweeten the deal.

Its a 2 per week service so there would be some demand but doubt its going for some sort of business market.

perhaps these are the identified ABX-MEL/SYD-ADL passengers already on QF?

RyanairGuru wrote:

Obzerva wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

New QFLink route Albury-Adelaide seasonal, interesting add and nice to see more regional connectivity -

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -take-off/

Out of interest, is this route driven by passenger demand, or just a good sales pitch for what is essentially a way of swapping Dash8’s between SA and the east coast?

There must be at least some demand, otherwise it would have made more sense to reinstate the once-weekly ADL-CBR Dash 8 flight which operated for several years before the pandemic. That said, there could be some local council or tourism body funding to sweeten the deal.

Wouldn’t surprise me if QF has suddenly realised there is money to be made in the regions and has been courting local councils for discounts and support - perhaps they have taken then for granted? Equally as above same could have been said for ZL, work with local councils? Speculation in my behalf.

In saying this we have seen shifts to regional-AU perhaps some markets have just grown?

Heard from a colleague today that REX has lost 10 737 pilots during the week.
Not sure of the validity of this, if true, with such a small 737 fleet, this might hurt them if true

FL420FT wrote:

Heard from a colleague today that REX has lost 10 737 pilots during the week.
Not sure of the validity of this, if true, with such a small 737 fleet, this might hurt them if true

On top of that, multiple 737 flights have been cancelled because of tech issues and around the same figure of 737 flight attendants have also left.

It’s a shame and a setback to what was looking like a good step in the door.

It makes me wonder what’s going on behind closed doors though.

LTEN11 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

This is a PR nightmare, but the traveling public have a short memory. Not that different to the mass disruptions when the fleet was grounded by AJ years back. However it will be interesting to see how QF recover their reputation - they will need to spend big on customer experience, and brand reinvention.

Interesting BA (who are not outsourced) are also facing similar challenges- they claim the staff shortages are due to slow security vetting for staff access passes. No one else would have had to ramp up like QF. I wonder if that’s an issue in AU too, having visitor passes on the ramp is a nightmare, with an escort requiring line of sight eye contact at all times. My ASIC passes took 4 weeks one year….

https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2022 ... oExRdJPK4Q

I feel very sorry for the poor bastards on the frontline left to mop up the mess of these missing bags an irate customers - certainly won’t help their staff retention either!

Hopefully for everyone we see this clear up now the peaks of Easter and holidays are over!

The problems with outsourcing isn’t just the problem, QF don’t have a say anymore as to when they’d like to operate their services, it’s the 3rd parties call as they determine when they’ll have resources available. Theres also their terrible work ethic and conditions compounded with practices such as split shifts, & if I was asked to work split shifts I would ask the boss to go jump.

The advantages of having your own ground handling resources is controlling when to have resources available, and incentives which come with it encouraging staff to stay on long term and loyal, Menzies, Dnata & Swissport have zero to no perks or incentives whatsoever…

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I take it you’ve never had to deal with a major out sourcing/labour hire group ? Most of these companies are extremely professional at what they do, but at the same token they are ruthless. The place I work at the actual number of full time workers is about 25%, the rest are casuals, they pay quite well by the hour, but of course that comes without the benefits of full time employment.

I’ve dealt with both & with confidence would say the professionalism is a far cry from professional compared with QFs pre-covid standards. Ruthless is perhaps the best word to describe their altitude towards staff and I’d leave it at that.

If the client wants staff at 4am on Sunday morning, they will get them. Want 50 today, but only 30 tomorrow, then 90 the day after, no problem, the agency simply sends a txt to who they choose and they show up. Don’t show up and the chances of getting the txt the next time round are very low.

I’d say we’ve all determined the current issues are both staff shortages & lack of experienced staff on top of the aggressive resumption of routes and additional capacity to fight off VA & ZL without a doubt.

For these companies like Dnata, Swissport, etc, the customer is king, they get what they want. The problem will be if the customer isn’t prepared to pay the market rate for staff, then you get a lower standard of staff, it’s the same in every industry. To say that outsourcing is a problem on its own and that those companies won’t provide a service when the customer needs it are wrong. The level of service provided will of course be relevant to the value of the contract, you may need 5 ground handlers to turn around a 737 on 30 mins, but if the customer is only prepared to pay for 4, then the outsourcing agent isn’t going to pay for the 5th person themselves, the customer can deal with that. however they want, as long as you do your best to do a turnaround as quickly as possible, with what you’ve got, then it’s the customers problem for basically being cheap. They do have to communicate these problems though, or the agent will get blamed.

Certainly hope they resolve these issues as it certainly dropped their standards especially when they are claiming premium bragging rights.

I don’t know who has the QF handling contract now, but obviously there are problems, will they get fixed, most likely, will they get fixed to prior QF standards, or what is expected by the people on this site, probably not.

The handling is split across Dnata, swissport & Menzies in all major ports.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Which of the QF A380’s are now retired? Qantas announced that 2 will not be returning. OQE is likely as no refurb or repaint, but all the rest have been either refurbed, repainted or both.

ben175 wrote:

CraigAnderson wrote:

EK, EY and QR are going out chockers from MEL too. You should see the line for check in every night!

My office is in the same building as the Melbourne Passport Office. Have never seen it so busy, I think Flight Centre made a big mistake closing their Collins Square outlet during lockdown 1 as it was in a prime location in the same complex. Used to see people in there booking flights straight after collecting their new passports. Not to mention all the people who work in the various offices.

tullamarine wrote:

jrfspa320 wrote:

tullamarine wrote:

I think AJ may need a holiday. Yet again, he appears to be blaming travellers for the woes suffered by QF over Easter. He now says passengers checking in early, as they were asked to, meant that the baggage systems became overloaded with unprocessed luggage.

The hike in numbers over Easter was not a surprise; most bookings would have been in the system 6-8 weeks ago. It seems to be a failing in management planning by QF that led to the problems rather than passengers. Even yesterday, there were reports of announcements in the arrivals hall that baggage was delayed as ground staff were only just arriving at the plane 1 hour after it landed.

VA and JQ had issues too over Easter but nothing compared to the meltdown that seems to have afflicted the supposed "premium" carrier.

Indeed, I'd love to know how many equivalent employees are contracted for ground services now and prior to being outsourced, i suspect its alot less.

Not sure if it true, but I heard that, when in-house, QF scheduled 5 staff to ground handle a 737 turnaround but under Swissport, the figure is 4 staff. 1 staff member doesn't sound much but a 20% reduction sure does.

When I worked at Swissport for VA it was common for 4 people to be rostered to do a 737 however then would be times where more resources would be available so you would have extra bodies assisting with the turn. 4 people can turn a 737 in 35-40 mins providing that it is executed properley

Just to give some background on some of the comments made in this thread about staffing issues and training. At Swissport to train a new person on ramp takes 2 weeks before they work unassisted. The first week in just theory going through module after module. Swissport goes through their own procedures and policies first then you go through specific theoretical training with the specific airline you are working for. The VA ground ops manual is over 800 pages long, so there is a lot to cover over the first week. The second week is practical training of which it is evenly spread between BMR and on the ramp. Once the training has completed, your initial first few weeks is either doing BMR and hold. For anything further you would require an ADA (Airside Driving).

At PER to get an ADA you must sit a theory test first then you are required to do a log book of 10 hours with a certified trainer before you can sit the practical driving test. When I was working at Swissport PER would only do ADA testing one afternoon each week so at any given time there were only about 6 people able to book for testing each week. The major complaint about ADA testing at PER for all ground handling companies was those who needed or wanted to get an ADA quite often had to wait weeks and in some cases a couple of months to get a 1 hour slot for a test. Of course if you failed the test you would have to start again

Once you have an ADA the next thing you would get trained on was water and waste trucks. From there you would move on to the Bravo position driving tugs moving baggage from BMR to aircraft and back again to BMR offload. Operating deck loaders would be next than pushback/towing would be the last one would be trained on. Additionally when issued with an ADA you will initially only be given a category of 2 (serving aprons) or 2.5 (aprons plus northern perimeter road from T1/2 to T3/4. To do pushbacks/towing you would need either a Category 3 (taxiways) or Category 4 (taxiways and runways). When getting an ADA you have to start at the bottom and work your way up

My point is it takes time to skill staff up and we have gone from 40% domestic pre covid capacity to 100% in a relatively short space of time, of course there are going to be some skill shortages. The writing was on the wall several months ago, I could see it then myself, if Qantas didnt see it coming well thats on them

Flyerqf wrote:

Which of the QF A380’s are now retired? Qantas announced that 2 will not be returning. OQE is likely as no refurb or repaint, but all the rest have been either refurbed, repainted or both.

It’s never been publicly confirmed which two aren’t returning. OQA and OQE are the two perennial rumours/guesses.

qf789 wrote:

tullamarine wrote:

jrfspa320 wrote:

Indeed, I'd love to know how many equivalent employees are contracted for ground services now and prior to being outsourced, i suspect its alot less.

Not sure if it true, but I heard that, when in-house, QF scheduled 5 staff to ground handle a 737 turnaround but under Swissport, the figure is 4 staff. 1 staff member doesn't sound much but a 20% reduction sure does.

When I worked at Swissport for VA it was common for 4 people to be rostered to do a 737 however then would be times where more resources would be available so you would have extra bodies assisting with the turn. 4 people can turn a 737 in 35-40 mins providing that it is executed properley

Just to give some background on some of the comments made in this thread about staffing issues and training. At Swissport to train a new person on ramp takes 2 weeks before they work unassisted. The first week in just theory going through module after module. Swissport goes through their own procedures and policies first then you go through specific theoretical training with the specific airline you are working for. The VA ground ops manual is over 800 pages long, so there is a lot to cover over the first week. The second week is practical training of which it is evenly spread between BMR and on the ramp. Once the training has completed, your initial first few weeks is either doing BMR and hold. For anything further you would require an ADA (Airside Driving).

At PER to get an ADA you must sit a theory test first then you are required to do a log book of 10 hours with a certified trainer before you can sit the practical driving test. When I was working at Swissport PER would only do ADA testing one afternoon each week so at any given time there were only about 6 people able to book for testing each week. The major complaint about ADA testing at PER for all ground handling companies was those who needed or wanted to get an ADA quite often had to wait weeks and in some cases a couple of months to get a 1 hour slot for a test. Of course if you failed the test you would have to start again

Once you have an ADA the next thing you would get trained on was water and waste trucks. From there you would move on to the Bravo position driving tugs moving baggage from BMR to aircraft and back again to BMR offload. Operating deck loaders would be next than pushback/towing would be the last one would be trained on. Additionally when issued with an ADA you will initially only be given a category of 2 (serving aprons) or 2.5 (aprons plus northern perimeter road from T1/2 to T3/4. To do pushbacks/towing you would need either a Category 3 (taxiways) or Category 4 (taxiways and runways). When getting an ADA you have to start at the bottom and work your way up

My point is it takes time to skill staff up and we have gone from 40% domestic pre covid capacity to 100% in a relatively short space of time, of course there are going to be some skill shortages. The writing was on the wall several months ago, I could see it then myself, if Qantas didnt see it coming well thats on them

How many staff do JQ use to handle the loading/unloading of an a320? Vs a VA/QF 738?

Would assume that the cam loading would reduce staff workload at the aircraft? But still require back end workload to load/unload cans.

RyanairGuru wrote:

Flyerqf wrote:

Which of the QF A380’s are now retired? Qantas announced that 2 will not be returning. OQE is likely as no refurb or repaint, but all the rest have been either refurbed, repainted or both.

It’s never been publicly confirmed which two aren’t returning. OQA and OQE are the two perennial rumours/guesses.

It will be OQE and OQF being retired. The A380s need three tasks completed - maintenance, cabin refurbishment, and repaint, in that order of priority. That leaves A, E, F, and L.

OQA will remain as it has the lowest hours in the fleet. OQL has the second lowest.
OQE has none of the above tasks done. OQF has a repaint but no maintenance work or refurbishment completed.

smi0006 wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

Obzerva wrote:

Out of interest, is this route driven by passenger demand, or just a good sales pitch for what is essentially a way of swapping Dash8’s between SA and the east coast?

There must be at least some demand, otherwise it would have made more sense to reinstate the once-weekly ADL-CBR Dash 8 flight which operated for several years before the pandemic. That said, there could be some local council or tourism body funding to sweeten the deal.

Wouldn’t surprise me if QF has suddenly realised there is money to be made in the regions and has been courting local councils for discounts and support - perhaps they have taken then for granted? Equally as above same could have been said for ZL, work with local councils? Speculation in my behalf.

In saying this we have seen shifts to regional-AU perhaps some markets have just grown?

TO be honest id say QF has always known theres money in the regions. QantasLink is known in airline finance to be the most profitable airline in Australia (at least pre covid). Id say that the ROCE metric was driving decisions tho and large return capital was easier to make money out of elsewhere, in volume terms, not ratio terms, so that is where the capital was sent. After all, this service is with at Q300 and I think the bendigo one was too (still might be?). QF might not see investment in small aircraft as being worth their time as much as say a bunch of 789s which might make less on a ratio basis but more overall given the larger volume of cashflow they can drive?

FiftyLitres wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

Flyerqf wrote:

Which of the QF A380’s are now retired? Qantas announced that 2 will not be returning. OQE is likely as no refurb or repaint, but all the rest have been either refurbed, repainted or both.

It’s never been publicly confirmed which two aren’t returning. OQA and OQE are the two perennial rumours/guesses.

It will be OQE and OQF being retired. The A380s need three tasks completed - maintenance, cabin refurbishment, and repaint, in that order of priority. That leaves A, E, F, and L.

OQA will remain as it has the lowest hours in the fleet. OQL has the second lowest.
OQE has none of the above tasks done. OQF has a repaint but no maintenance work or refurbishment completed.

Just to clarify, are you saying that OQE and OQF are confirmed internally, or are you staying an opinion?

While OQA has fewer hours, it is structurally heavier due to being both an early production model and the extensive repairs undertaken. That said, I totally understand that when the next HMV is due will be a determining factor, and that does count against OQF.