I recently watched this ABC Four Corners video that highlights the operational issues at Qantas and how outsourcing has impacted the brand. It's 44 minutes long but shows the complications facing the safest airline in the world that recently sacked 35% of their engineers.

https://youtu.be/iQKnazRIEc8

I'm sorry, but this is riddled with smear, hyperbole, and innuendo. The QF brand is stronger than ever--its fleet renewal scheme and Project Sunrise venture are testaments to that.

BoeingG wrote:

I'm sorry, but this is riddled with smear, hyperbole, and innuendo. The QF brand is stronger than ever--its fleet renewal scheme and Project Sunrise venture are testaments to that.

Is it?!

Not sure if you're Australian but I would argue that the QF brand is as weak as ever with constant bad press relating to industrial action, constant delays and stranded passengers.

BoeingG wrote:

I'm sorry, but this is riddled with smear, hyperbole, and innuendo. The QF brand is stronger than ever--its fleet renewal scheme and Project Sunrise venture are testaments to that.

To pretend that Qantas is stronger than ever is disingenuous. Currently QF is begging corporate management to come load aircraft because they outsourced ground handling. The Project Sunrise order timing was to deflect from their atrocious operations of late. While this video is clearly one-sided it doesn't mean that the people being interviewed aren't being sincere.

https://www.businessinsider.com/qantas- ... age-2022-8

JohanTally wrote:

Currently QF is begging corporate management to come load aircraft because they outsourced ground handling.

It was quite funny listening to the former ground handlers having a beer and laugh when told that corporate executives, who spend all their day in a office, are suddenly going to cope with a physically intensive job with long hours. It’s actually so far fetched I’m pretty sure that in the end there wasn’t a single executive who actually made it out on the ramp.

The Project Sunrise order timing was to deflect from their atrocious operations of late.

Sunrise was ordered May 2, well before the operational challenges which started over winter.

Official response:

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/featu ... ers-story/

Is this an entirely QF issue? They’ve been operating quite poorly absolutely, however with the re-emergence of a lot of air travel I’m sure many airlines (and I know for sure airports) are really struggling to match what they once were.
Covid pushed or gave many an exit out their respective airlines. Meaning experience and knowledge gained from years and years was also shown the door, only to be replaced imo by trainees and new sometimes lacklustre approaches.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

Currently QF is begging corporate management to come load aircraft because they outsourced ground handling.

It was quite funny listening to the former ground handlers having a beer and laugh when told that corporate executives, who spend all their day in a office, are suddenly going to cope with a physically intensive job with long hours. It’s actually so far fetched I’m pretty sure that in the end there wasn’t a single executive who actually made it out on the ramp.

The Project Sunrise order timing was to deflect from their atrocious operations of late.

Sunrise was ordered May 2, well before the operational challenges which started over winter.

Official response:

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/featu ... ers-story/

This is actually the second time asking executives to come help on the ramp. The original event was ongoing during the Project Sunrise order.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/busine ... 0d7d0ba516

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

Goodbye wrote:

BoeingG wrote:

I'm sorry, but this is riddled with smear, hyperbole, and innuendo. The QF brand is stronger than ever--its fleet renewal scheme and Project Sunrise venture are testaments to that.

Is it?!

Not sure if you're Australian but I would argue that the QF brand is as weak as ever with constant bad press relating to industrial action, constant delays and stranded passengers.

Moreso than other carriers? I think not. These have been difficult, in fact unprecedented times for the industry. Qantas has prevailed, and has been so successful that it is accelerating 380 reactivation to meet demand. No, it isn't without its issues. But smear campaigns rooted in sensationalism are weak proof of them.

JohanTally wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

Currently QF is begging corporate management to come load aircraft because they outsourced ground handling.

It was quite funny listening to the former ground handlers having a beer and laugh when told that corporate executives, who spend all their day in a office, are suddenly going to cope with a physically intensive job with long hours. It’s actually so far fetched I’m pretty sure that in the end there wasn’t a single executive who actually made it out on the ramp.

The Project Sunrise order timing was to deflect from their atrocious operations of late.

Sunrise was ordered May 2, well before the operational challenges which started over winter.

Official response:

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/featu ... ers-story/

This is actually the second time asking executives to come help on the ramp. The original event was ongoing during the Project Sunrise order.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/busine ... 0d7d0ba516

Curious that this report centers on Qantas rather than the industry at large. Many of the shortfalls cited aren't unique to Qantas. Icelandair has done something similar. Lest we forget Heathrow's baggage woes and Dublin's seemingly-never-ending security queues. These are merely a few examples of industry-wide challenges at present.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

Currently QF is begging corporate management to come load aircraft because they outsourced ground handling.

It was quite funny listening to the former ground handlers having a beer and laugh when told that corporate executives, who spend all their day in a office, are suddenly going to cope with a physically intensive job with long hours. It’s actually so far fetched I’m pretty sure that in the end there wasn’t a single executive who actually made it out on the ramp.

The Project Sunrise order timing was to deflect from their atrocious operations of late.

Sunrise was ordered May 2, well before the operational challenges which started over winter.

Official response:

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/featu ... ers-story/

Well, which one is it--are the challenges recent, or are they owing to the pandemic? One can't have it both ways.

BoeingG wrote:

Goodbye wrote:

BoeingG wrote:

I'm sorry, but this is riddled with smear, hyperbole, and innuendo. The QF brand is stronger than ever--its fleet renewal scheme and Project Sunrise venture are testaments to that.

Is it?!

Not sure if you're Australian but I would argue that the QF brand is as weak as ever with constant bad press relating to industrial action, constant delays and stranded passengers.

Moreso than other carriers? I think not. These have been difficult, in fact unprecedented times for the industry. Qantas has prevailed, and has been so successful that it is accelerating 380 reactivation to meet demand. No, it isn't without its issues. But smear campaigns rooted in sensationalism are weak proof of them.

We're not talking about other carriers - we're talking about QF which has taken a PR battering (and rightly so) lately. Calling all the issues QF is facing right now with their staffing and delays "sensationalism" is ridiculous.

BoeingG wrote:

Goodbye wrote:

BoeingG wrote:

I'm sorry, but this is riddled with smear, hyperbole, and innuendo. The QF brand is stronger than ever--its fleet renewal scheme and Project Sunrise venture are testaments to that.

Is it?!

Not sure if you're Australian but I would argue that the QF brand is as weak as ever with constant bad press relating to industrial action, constant delays and stranded passengers.

Moreso than other carriers? I think not. These have been difficult, in fact unprecedented times for the industry. Qantas has prevailed, and has been so successful that it is accelerating 380 reactivation to meet demand. No, it isn't without its issues. But smear campaigns rooted in sensationalism are weak proof of them.

QF was mishandling 10% of all luggage recently I'm sorry but that is not happening anywhere else in the civilized world.

BoeingG wrote:

Well, which one is it--are the challenges recent, or are they owing to the pandemic? One can't have it both ways.

A little from column A, a little from column B, wrapped up with some long-term plans to shed parts of the business which now look like a bad decision.

Let's focus on the ground handling element. For the best part of 20 years, various shades of Qantas management have been seeking to get the airline out of ground handling, but there hasn't been a clear way to do it without leading to massive chaos. Covid provided that opportunity, but let's be clear that it was a legitimate reason. Like every other airline around the world, Qantas was expecting the recovery of traffic to be gradual and, at best, lumpy. There is no way they could justify carrying a few thousand staff when the operations were going to be a shadow of what they were, and the cost savings of outsourcing and only having to buy the services from Dnata, Menzies and whichever other company as they were needed, were too hard to ignore.

Of course, what we now know is that demand has been off the hook, and has been sustained for much longer than expected. And so, having jettisoned all of those employees, and with their third party handlers not able to scale up to meet that demand, the wheels fell off. Many of the employees they let go are not looking to return to the industry, especially under less favourable conditions at a third party handler.

There are also issues of short-staffing in other areas due to crew sickness, delays in getting new crew trained up and a whole host of other factors which are being felt by the industry writ large, although some airlines are better at hiding it than others!

Amid all of this, Qantas has continued to sell itself as the premium airline and not delivering on that experience. Staff are stressed out and not feeling valued by head office, so are not willing to go the extra mile that they may have previously. The high demand has pushed up airfares and the premium that Qantas charges, but passengers aren't feeling that they are getting value if their flights are delayed, bags go missing or facing mass cancellations. For many Australians, Qantas is a very emotive brand and so is held to a different level of accountability than others, so when it's not delivering passengers take it personally.

Before the pandemic, I flew on Qantas twice from HKG to SYD and both times, the flights were absolutely underwhelming. On the surface Qantas plays off as a premium airline but without premium service both hard and soft product. The onboard staff were apathetic, disinterested and unfriendly.

BoeingG wrote:

Curious that this report centers on Qantas rather than the industry at large. Many of the shortfalls cited aren't unique to Qantas. ... These are merely a few examples of industry-wide challenges at present.

Exactly it's a pretty poor ABC hit piece with little journalistic integrity.

Conflating outsourcing with the global issues that are seen from restarting a labor-heavy industry that has been operating on idle for a few years.

Even if Qantas hadn't done the outsourcing the issues would still be occurring - as they are for example in the pilot pool where a heap of pilots retired at Covid, and they are now struggling to get everyone current and train more.

Joyce deflected blame when told the public that they were not 'Match fit'

moa999 wrote:

BoeingG wrote:

Curious that this report centers on Qantas rather than the industry at large. Many of the shortfalls cited aren't unique to Qantas. ... These are merely a few examples of industry-wide challenges at present.

Exactly it's a pretty poor ABC hit piece with little journalistic integrity.

Conflating outsourcing with the global issues that are seen from restarting a labor-heavy industry that has been operating on idle for a few years.

Even if Qantas hadn't done the outsourcing the issues would still be occurring - as they are for example in the pilot pool where a heap of pilots retired at Covid, and they are now struggling to get everyone current and train more.

4 Corners is an Australian investigative journalism program which is why they focused on the largest Australian airline. It's common knowledge that Qantas has pitted wholly owned subsidiaries against one another to drive down costs which is highlighted in the Australian program.

bakestar wrote:

Is this an entirely QF issue? They’ve been operating quite poorly absolutely, however with the re-emergence of a lot of air travel I’m sure many airlines (and I know for sure airports) are really struggling to match what they once were.
Covid pushed or gave many an exit out their respective airlines. Meaning experience and knowledge gained from years and years was also shown the door, only to be replaced imo by trainees and new sometimes lacklustre approaches.

My thoughts exactly. This looks like a hit piece that doesn't check the rest of the industry for comparison.

Aesma wrote:

bakestar wrote:

Is this an entirely QF issue? They’ve been operating quite poorly absolutely, however with the re-emergence of a lot of air travel I’m sure many airlines (and I know for sure airports) are really struggling to match what they once were.
Covid pushed or gave many an exit out their respective airlines. Meaning experience and knowledge gained from years and years was also shown the door, only to be replaced imo by trainees and new sometimes lacklustre approaches.

My thoughts exactly. This looks like a hit piece that doesn't check the rest of the industry for comparison.

So you’ve seen the program then? Or are you commenting without having seen it?

Well QF forgot to cater my flight… so not happy jan!

While this is not Qantas itself, it is still the Qantas group (7 hours old article)
https://www.travelweekly.com.au/article ... ellations/

Another article on Qantas in general (and why they will stay a mess for a while)
https://theconversation.com/qantas-the- ... oon-189558

And while Qantas was planning to restart SFO in October, that has now been delayed till March 2023 or later
https://aviationsourcenews.com/news/qan ... o-restart/

And from Bloomberg: "Passengers Hate Qantas. Shareholders Aren’t Bothered"
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/artic ... ers-suffer

The Qantas group is in an extremely bad state compared with the rest of the industry. And there was enough COVID financial support from the Australian government that this should not have happened.

One other problem with QF is that during COVID they did not fly freight internationally. They completely shut down international routes. SQ became the national carrier of Australia and had a direct contract with the Australian Government to ensure Australian supply lines did stay in tact and food continued to be exported the rest of the world.

"New planes don't need maintenance" quote from someone surprisingly high up in QF management a few years ago. Explains a lot of the attitudes towards engineering staff.

JohanTally wrote:

To pretend that Qantas is stronger than ever is disingenuous.

Indeed. Whether people want to accept it or not, the airline has become a hot mess over recent months. Operational reliability is an absolute disaster. A lot of very loyal frequent fliers have been alienated by the recent chaos. That trust won't be re-built overnight.

More to the point, there doesn't really seem to be an end in sight. Things will surely get worse over the summer season.

atsiang wrote:

Before the pandemic, I flew on Qantas twice from HKG to SYD and both times, the flights were absolutely underwhelming. On the surface Qantas plays off as a premium airline but without premium service both hard and soft product. The onboard staff were apathetic, disinterested and unfriendly.

This has been my experience on every Qantas flight, be it long or short haul. QF are never my first choice anymore when I'm looking at travelling.

Goodbye wrote:

atsiang wrote:

Before the pandemic, I flew on Qantas twice from HKG to SYD and both times, the flights were absolutely underwhelming. On the surface Qantas plays off as a premium airline but without premium service both hard and soft product. The onboard staff were apathetic, disinterested and unfriendly.

This has been my experience on every Qantas flight, be it long or short haul. QF are never my first choice anymore when I'm looking at travelling.

Do you feel like Qantas brand recognition is starting to be overtaken by passenger sentiment? Were they a better airline prior to the founding of OneWorld?

Anecdotes are not evidence of a systemic issue.

This program is focussed entirely on an Australian audience. Hardly a shock that they have focussed on Qantas and not overseas carriers. Regardless of what is happening to the rest of the industry, Australian passengers are angry at Qantas after six months of utter chaos. The airline is a hot mess, and - significantly - Virgin Australia are running a much better operation despite facing the same staffing pressures. That’s what annoys Australian passengers, regardless of whether an airline in Iceland or elsewhere is doing better or worse than Qantas. Six weeks ago I honestly thought the Qantas brand was irreparably damaged, but after recent moves to gift frequent flyer status etc. I think they’ve done just enough to buy themselves another six months to sort things out. Things have been going a bit better recently, but August is one of the slowest times of the year for travel in Australia, being winter and not school holidays, but whether they can get through the September/October school holidays and summer without imploding again will determine how quickly passengers move on and forget.

BoeingG wrote:

Anecdotes are not evidence of a systemic issue.

There is intrinsic evidence of a systemic issue when executives start loading and unloading aircraft for 3 month stints.

TWU National Secretary Michael Kaine spoke in front of Sky News and at the end the reporter alluded to a potential industrial action event in the future.

https://youtu.be/gpkEopgG9MY

moa999 wrote:

BoeingG wrote:

Curious that this report centers on Qantas rather than the industry at large. Many of the shortfalls cited aren't unique to Qantas. ... These are merely a few examples of industry-wide challenges at present.

Exactly it's a pretty poor ABC hit piece with little journalistic integrity.

Conflating outsourcing with the global issues that are seen from restarting a labor-heavy industry that has been operating on idle for a few years.

Even if Qantas hadn't done the outsourcing the issues would still be occurring - as they are for example in the pilot pool where a heap of pilots retired at Covid, and they are now struggling to get everyone current and train more.

There was one public policy piece that seemed to explain a lot, that the the airlines were eligible for government bailouts, but that because QANTAS chose to outsource their ground handling in 2020, the new ground handlers were excluded hence resulting in a massive staffing problem at the ground handler that didn’t impact in house groups when the non-carrier specific bailouts ended.

For international readers not familiar with Australian media - they love a good Qantas beat up. This is not to say there are not issues that are causing major problems, but take this article with the requisite amount of salt. Qantas sells media clicks and views across all sources, and this is no different.

Having watched the show today, I find it incredibly interesting that airlines (and most likely other industries) can get away with hiring crew on different subsidiaries (2 alone in Australia from what was said) and they have different pay scales and other benefits yet doing the same job. Absolutely ridiculous in all industries that's allowed to happen really. I get cost cutting and trying to save a business but does it really need to be like that? Honestly would have thought they wouldn't want to have their staff on such differences doing the same job.
Though Joyce's response at the end when he's asked if it's fair or not, his pretty pathetic response shows he doesn't care which is a pity and showing the current state of Qantas management in my opinion.

mrkerr7474 wrote:

Having watched the show today, I find it incredibly interesting that airlines (and most likely other industries) can get away with hiring crew on different subsidiaries (2 alone in Australia from what was said) and they have different pay scales and other benefits yet doing the same job. Absolutely ridiculous in all industries that's allowed to happen really. I get cost cutting and trying to save a business but does it really need to be like that? Honestly would have thought they wouldn't want to have their staff on such differences doing the same job.
Though Joyce's response at the end when he's asked if it's fair or not, his pretty pathetic response shows he doesn't care which is a pity and showing the current state of Qantas management in my opinion.

Mining is no different. Same job under same company at different mines can have different labor rates.

Qantas has its problems, which is why I am hesitant to book with them internationally until they are sorted out, but this story sounds like it was written by the militant unions.

qf2220 wrote:

For international readers not familiar with Australian media - they love a good Qantas beat up. This is not to say there are not issues that are causing major problems, but take this article with the requisite amount of salt. Qantas sells media clicks and views across all sources, and this is no different.

True, the word Qantas does generate eye balls on stories, on the flip side of the “beat up” Qantas plays the Australian media with regular frequency, giving them free seats on “test flights” etc generating constant good news stories on announcements and re-announcements.

Writing this off as just a beat up would be to dismiss the fact that Qantas can’t just have good news stories published, some would call that advertising

BoeingG wrote:

Anecdotes are not evidence of a systemic issue.

Correct. And anecdotes of good deeds or good experience are not evidence of a smooth running operation either. It seems Qantas does indeed have many issues, too many to make them just anecdotes.

mrkerr7474 wrote:

Having watched the show today, I find it incredibly interesting that airlines (and most likely other industries) can get away with hiring crew on different subsidiaries (2 alone in Australia from what was said) and they have different pay scales and other benefits yet doing the same job. Absolutely ridiculous in all industries that's allowed to happen really. I get cost cutting and trying to save a business but does it really need to be like that? Honestly would have thought they wouldn't want to have their staff on such differences doing the same job.
Though Joyce's response at the end when he's asked if it's fair or not, his pretty pathetic response shows he doesn't care which is a pity and showing the current state of Qantas management in my opinion.

One flight attendant in the video said that there might be 4 different subsidiaries working as the same cabin crew. He was working QF A380s yet wasn't even a Qantas employee after 16 years in the system. This practice has to create animosity between the workers which would create an unnecessary distraction IMHO.

JohanTally wrote:

mrkerr7474 wrote:

Having watched the show today, I find it incredibly interesting that airlines (and most likely other industries) can get away with hiring crew on different subsidiaries (2 alone in Australia from what was said) and they have different pay scales and other benefits yet doing the same job. Absolutely ridiculous in all industries that's allowed to happen really. I get cost cutting and trying to save a business but does it really need to be like that? Honestly would have thought they wouldn't want to have their staff on such differences doing the same job.
Though Joyce's response at the end when he's asked if it's fair or not, his pretty pathetic response shows he doesn't care which is a pity and showing the current state of Qantas management in my opinion.

One flight attendant in the video said that there might be 4 different subsidiaries working as the same cabin crew. He was working QF A380s yet wasn't even a Qantas employee after 16 years in the system. This practice has to create animosity between the workers which would create an unnecessary distraction IMHO.

Fully agree with you. If I was ever to run a company like an airline, I sure wouldn't want my workers on 4 different subsidiaries doing the same job on the same plane, so although I can understand cost cutting to an extent, I just don't get how they are happy to have the airline running like that.

mrkerr7474 wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

mrkerr7474 wrote:

Having watched the show today, I find it incredibly interesting that airlines (and most likely other industries) can get away with hiring crew on different subsidiaries (2 alone in Australia from what was said) and they have different pay scales and other benefits yet doing the same job. Absolutely ridiculous in all industries that's allowed to happen really. I get cost cutting and trying to save a business but does it really need to be like that? Honestly would have thought they wouldn't want to have their staff on such differences doing the same job.
Though Joyce's response at the end when he's asked if it's fair or not, his pretty pathetic response shows he doesn't care which is a pity and showing the current state of Qantas management in my opinion.

One flight attendant in the video said that there might be 4 different subsidiaries working as the same cabin crew. He was working QF A380s yet wasn't even a Qantas employee after 16 years in the system. This practice has to create animosity between the workers which would create an unnecessary distraction IMHO.

Fully agree with you. If I was ever to run a company like an airline, I sure wouldn't want my workers on 4 different subsidiaries doing the same job on the same plane, so although I can understand cost cutting to an extent, I just don't get how they are happy to have the airline running like that.

Its standard practice in other industries. I work for the biggest miner in the world which is based out of Melbourne, in our team you have staff and contractors. Both the contractors and staff have the same job title and roles, yet there is a difference between remuneration between the two groups. Even within the contractors the remuneration, terms and conditions are different. I am a contractor and have been given the opportunity to be a staff, but declined.

Not sure what is the issue with those who work at Qantas.

oceanvikram wrote:

mrkerr7474 wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

One flight attendant in the video said that there might be 4 different subsidiaries working as the same cabin crew. He was working QF A380s yet wasn't even a Qantas employee after 16 years in the system. This practice has to create animosity between the workers which would create an unnecessary distraction IMHO.

Fully agree with you. If I was ever to run a company like an airline, I sure wouldn't want my workers on 4 different subsidiaries doing the same job on the same plane, so although I can understand cost cutting to an extent, I just don't get how they are happy to have the airline running like that.

Its standard practice in other industries. I work for the biggest miner in the world which is based out of Melbourne, in our team you have staff and contractors. Both the contractors and staff have the same job title and roles, yet there is a difference between remuneration between the two groups. Even within the contractors the remuneration, terms and conditions are different. I am a contractor and have been given the opportunity to be a staff, but declined.

Not sure what is the issue with those who work at Qantas.

Do this miner do this practice solely to drive down wages?

JohanTally wrote:

Do this miner do this practice solely to drive down wages?

No ... but it is one of the reasons. Contractor's are better paid than staff, however there is no job security, no development opportunities and promotions. Any training that is available is to ensure the contractor can do their job successfully and safely as in new processes and/or systems.

I have also worked in the oil &gas industry and it is the same. The employment contract clearly provides the terms and conditions so we know what we are signing up to.

oceanvikram wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

Do this miner do this practice solely to drive down wages?

No ... but it is one of the reasons. Contractor's are better paid than staff, however there is no job security, no development opportunities and promotions. Any training that is available is to ensure the contractor can do their job successfully and safely as in new processes and/or systems.

I have also worked in the oil &gas industry and it is the same. The employment contract clearly provides the terms and conditions so we know what we are signing up to.

I work in the public sector and it is a similar situation. Contractors often earn higher remuneration, and are often on different terms from person to person, but lack job security, progression etc.

That is totally different to what Qantas are doing. It is purely about lower cost than their long-term union employees. Cabin crew only require year 10 equivalent education and ~10 weeks training. Of course other skills and experience come into it, but Qantas does not see that. They just see an 18 year old willing to work on a casual contract for much lower than existing crew. They’ve even done it with pilots, forcing “productivity” enhancements on the 787 and A350 crew by using the threat of placing those fleets with a separate subsidiary (think NationalJet, Network Aviation etc) if the real-Qantas pilots didn’t accept those terms.

BoeingG wrote:

Anecdotes are not evidence of a systemic issue.

This article should change your mindset... and this QF problem was highlighted by some posters many months ago when it was evident the published timetables could not be operated:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ould-serve

RyanairGuru wrote:

That is totally different to what Qantas are doing. It is purely about lower cost than their long-term union employees.

And what is wrong with that?

In mining and oil & gas, they did exactly the same thing circa 30 years. You had a team where some were staff, others were one contract rates and rest were seconded from engineering companies. All with the same title, roles and responsibilities.

I don't remember anyone making a song and a dance out of it and I am sure many Australians are happy with their superannuation growth.