QANTAS

[midfielder]

Were do you start... IMO the management should have given a least a weeks notice of their intention... talk about shit in your own house or trash your own brand...

 

[dibo]

at the very least, don't lock out staff the day after you give your CEO a $2 million pay kick.

fair work australia will intervene, cancel the (unions') industrial action and if no resolution in 21 days then they will compulsorily arbitrate.

this is one of the strengths of fair work - it forces parties to the table, and the last-resort position is to force a solution, not to just hand the whip to employers.

gillard (as architect of fair work) should get a lot of credit for this if it doesn't go completely tits up, and even then i think most people will blame joyce.

 

[scottmac]

Gillard should have had the balls to force this before Joyce did what he did.

 

[dibo]

So government should be actively intervening in industrial disputes? That doesn't sound like a good idea - there is a set of rules governing industrial relations, and both sides should be free to work to the rule book without the uncertainty of government intervention - will they, won't they, what's the trigger point etc.

The transport minister says he asked qantas if there was anything the government could do to bring the parties back to the table and he says he was told "it's a board decision and it's done".

Short of the government basically taking over the business, I don't see what they're supposed to do in that position other than allow the independent umpire to do its work.

 

[hasbeen]

So government should be actively intervening in industrial disputes? That doesn't sound like a good idea - there is a set of rules governing industrial relations, and both sides should be free to work to the rule book without the uncertainty of government intervention - will they, won't they, what's the trigger point etc.

The transport minister says he asked qantas if there was anything the government could do to bring the parties back to the table and he says he was told "it's a board decision and it's done".

Short of the government basically taking over the business, I don't see what they're supposed to do in that position other than allow the independent umpire to do its work.

Joyce phoned Gillard's office before the decision, they didn't bother to reply. Albanese knew 3 hours beforehand (Joyce again) that Qantas was about to pull the plug and ground flights, but he did nothing. Albanese was also informed 2 weeks ago about Qantas' financial situation with regards to the Union demands, so he at least had a heads-up on why Qantas was behaving the way it was. Unions are an outdated anachronism (and still welded on to the ALP), fighting for unrealistic demands in a real world. Still it will be interesting to see what the independent tribunal makes of all of this.

 

[scottmac]

So government should be actively intervening in industrial disputes?

When they directly threaten the economy of our country, yes they should. Otherwise why get involved now? Your staunch Labour tendancies will not win you through on this one Dibo.

 

[dibo]

Joyce phoned Gillard's office before the decision, they didn't bother to reply. Albanese knew 3 hours beforehand (Joyce again) that Qantas was about to pull the plug and ground flights, but he did nothing. Albanese was also informed 2 weeks ago about Qantas' financial situation with regards to the Union demands, so he at least had a heads-up on why Qantas was behaving the way it was. Unions are an outdated anachronism (and still welded on to the ALP), fighting for unrealistic demands in a real world. Still it will be interesting to see what the independent tribunal makes of all of this.

Joyce himself disputed the details of those reports. He said he rang to *tell* them what was happening. Albo spoke to him asking if there was anything the Govt could do and was told no, it's done, it's a Board decision.There's nothing the Government could have or should have done other than getting FWA involved and letting the independent umpire sort it out. That's why we have them.

I have to laugh at the notion of unions being an outdated anachronism. I suppose we're all supposed to go cap in hand to the boss to see if the company can spare any loose change after they've given themselves a $2 million pay rise.

"Sorry kiddo, times are tough don't you know?"

Unions have gone into 'negotiations' with logs of claims, only to be told "forget all that, take this by 5pm or it's off the table".

These are experts on the union side, they understand business, they understand the industrial law, they know their members' rights inside out. They're not thugs in blue singlets, for the most part they're economists and lawyers who are looking to ensure that the business is set up in a way to deliver lasting returns to their members.

If the workers collectively are being treated with such withering contempt, what chance the individuals?

When they directly threaten the economy of our country, yes they should. Otherwise why get involved now? Your staunch Labour tendancies will not win you through on this one Dibo.

What did more damage - the industrial action of the three unions, or the industrial action of QANTAS? Who grounded more planes? Who cost more tourism dollars? Who created more uncertainty?

The big economic damage, the big uncertainty was created by Joyce. He wilfully took the national carrier out of the air as a bargaining play. He's trashing the brand and destroying shareholder value for the sake of a fight.

And through all this, the Liberals are actually lambasting the Government for not taking action sooner! The Liberals are complaining that the Government didn't force the matter to arbitration! Liberals arguing for *government intervention into industrial relations*! Under WorkChoices, the Government wouldn't have been able to force an outcome, QANTAS would have had to freeze out the workforce for an extended period or hire scab labour.

The unions have done exactly as they should - tried to negotiate in their members' interest, and taken protected industrial action as provided for by law (and which would have been possible under WorkChoices too). The Government has allowed the fair work laws to do their work.

Alan Joyce hasn't acted in QANTAS's best interests because he and his reckless actions have become the story, he's allowed his own brinkmanship to be the trigger of the FWA intervention and he's now going to be forced to compulsory arbitration.

 

[dibo]

AFR: What the unions want

PRINT EDITION: 30 Oct 2011
Pip Freebairn and Melanie Beeby

Qantas head Alan Joyce has labelled them “impossible demands” but the unions representing long-haul pilots, engineers and ground staff argue they are trying to save local jobs as management looks to lower costs through foreign and contract labour.

The three unions involved in the dispute, the Australian and International Pilots Association, Australian Licenced Engineers Association and the Transport Workers Union, say they understand the competitive pressures facing the airline and are not asking for a “job for life”.

TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION
* The TWU, which is negotiating a new agreement for 3800 baggage handlers, ground staff and ramp services staff such as caterers, asked for a 5 per cent rise, but has already indicated this figure is negotiable and it will settle at a lower rate.
* But the TWU is concerned about Qantas’s use of cheaper contract labour that threatens the livelihood of its members.
* The union says most of its workers on the agreement are paid a base salary of $38,000 a year and rely on shift penalties and overtime to make a wage that covers the cost of living. It says this overtime work has been undermined by contracting out over the past 18 months.
* The TWU says it understands the company needs “operational flexibility” but wants only 20pc of work to be done by contractors, compared with Qantas’s preferred level of 55pc.

The TWU is also seeking:
* Protection for terms and conditions in terms of safety, training and standards – to apply to Qantas staff and all contractors
* Qantas to resolve what it says are long-standing aviation security issues and a lack of safety protocols for employees
* Rights of injured workers to be treated with dignity and respect
* Commitments to a mutual relationship and good faith bargaining

AUSTRALIAN LICENCED AIRCRAFT ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION
* The ALAEA is negotiating on behalf of 1600 licensed Qantas engineers for an agreement that expired on January 1.
* It is seeking a 3pc a year pay rise and faster progression by engineers through the payscale.
* The engineers’ most contentious clause is that Qantas commit to local engineers doing heavy maintenance on the company’s growing fleet of new A380s in the coming years. Local engineers already do line-maintenance, or the day-to-day upkeep of planes, but heavy maintenance engineering starts on an aircraft only after several years of operation. A380s were introduced in late 2008.
* Qantas management says it does not have the scale of operation to establish a A380 maintenance hangar in Australia that would be viable. But the union says the likely alternative of “offshoring” the maintenance to Philippines raises safety concerns.

AUSTRALIAN AND INTERNATIONAL PILOTS ASSOCIATION
* The AIPA is negotiating the current agreement on behalf of 1700 long-haul Qantas pilots who fly larger aircraft like Boeing 747s, 767s and Airbus A380s and A330s, and has not staged industrial action in 44 years.
* The union wants a 2.5pc a year wage rise, which is says is negotiable.
* The key issue is a Qantas flight/Qantas pilot clause, which would see all Qantas flights operated by Qantas pilots.
* Without this clause, the pilots group says the airline’s management will look to employ foreign pilots or use the lower-paid Jetstar pilots on Qantas-coded flights. The pilots are worried Qantas’s plans to move to Asia will mean that lower-skilled foreign pilots will be flying Qantas-branded flights, raising safety concerns and reducing the amount of work available for them.
* Qantas argues it can not continue to operate if it is forced to pay all the pilots the same pay and conditions.
* AIPA says its industrial action has not cost the company a cent in revenue, delayed passengers or grounded any flights, and that its entire public industrial action over the past four months has been to make positive in-flight announcements and to wear red ties with a campaign message on them.

WHAT QANTAS SAYS
* There are 15 unions in Qantas and in the past 15 months it reached agreements with more than 10,000 employees represented by four unions on five enterprise agreements – or one-third of the Qantas workforce.
* Qantas says its TWU staff are the best paid in the country – 12pc higher than their equivalents in Virgin Australia – and its pilots and licensed engineers are among the best compensated in the world with its long-haul pilots, for example, earning 50pc more than their peers at Virgin
* It claims the three unions are seeking pay and conditions that would put Qantas staff further beyond its competitors and that they want the right to control key elements of how the company is run.
“Quite simply these three unions are not representative of the broader union movement. They want to be paid to do work that no longer exists due to the advent of new aircraft; they want to retain outdated work practices; they want to tell us what we can and can’t change,” CEO Alan Joyce said earlier this month.
“Effectively they are trying to dictate how we run Qantas – whether it is the pilots’ union demanding the right to dictate pilot pay rates in Jetstar, or the licensed engineers demanding a veto on the modernisation of work practices, or the TWU wanting to limit our use of contractors.”

with wires
The Australian Financial Review

 

[hasbeen]

<< Transport Workers Union national secretary Tony Sheldon is also holding a press conference this morning. He said the union, which represents Qantas ground staff and baggage handlers, is considering appealing against the decision to halt industrial action for the next 21 days.

* "If the company negotiates in good faith, which is what we're expecting the company to do, the next 21 days we will not be taking industrial action. We are also considering with our legal advisers whether we should appeal this decision." >>

Ah yes, one rule for the unions and one for Qantas. If the unions aren't going to abide by Fair Work Australia ruling because it doesn't suit them, then why bother having the damn thing at all? Another epic fail by the Govt.

 

[dibo]

Watch what happens if the union steps outside - they'll be whacked with enormous fines, just as QANTAS would be.

 

[kevrenor]

Ah yes, one rule for the unions and one for Qantas. If the unions aren't going to abide by Fair Work Australia ruling because it doesn't suit them, then why bother having the damn thing at all? Another epic fail by the Govt.

They all have the same rules .. both parties are bound by them under threat of sanctions .. it is up to them although one has to say the sanctions are weighted against the unions.

I don't vote labor or liberal, but I'll do a FWA and adjudicate - that Dibo is closer to being correct than you hasbeen.

 

[midfielder]

I think the whole thing is very confusing with lots of different angles…

I think governments both sides, have created a situation where there can be no winners…

Many of the airline QANTAS competes with are heavily government subsidiaries by their governments. Meaning QANTAS is often competing with airlines running at a loss…

You can argue as economics do OK so be it lets do what we are efficient at and other governments make those calls… However with QANTAS the answer is no so clear because the so called ‘’’ Over Paid ground Engineers”” … yes compared to other countries these people are paid more in Australia…. BUT & a MEGA BUT nay a MAGA SQUARED BUT is these same QANTAS ground engineers do most of the maintenance work on the Australian Air force plans… meaning the skills the QANTAS ground engineers have is also a defence issue…

I assume QANTAS charges for its work … but the basic skill set needed is beyond the Air Force in its current state…

So we have many things in the pot… as for Joyce I think what he did was beyond stupid and he lost a great deal of public support… He could have achieved the same outcome by threatening to ground the fleet in a week if nothing happened…

QANTAS management cannot hide the fact they brought the wrong plane that still has not been delivered yet…

So in summary QANTAS cannot compete with other airlines in this current cost setup, often because various governments do not [ and cannot I suppose] place the same demands on overseas airlines, they do of QANTAS, but they do allow these airlines access to our airports…

From a defence perspective we cannot let the skill set go that QANTS have established…

What I see into the future is QANTAS becoming a small exclusive airline, and running a International Jet Star operation as well… and for the ground engineers HMMMMMMMRRRRRR that depends on how much the governments wants to take some of the defence budget and keep the QANTAS ground engineers in place…

I have no answers to these questions just looking at the thing and saying to myself this is a real mess, that has taken about twenty years to come to a head.

 

[pjennings]

Joyce phoned Gillard's office before the decision, they didn't bother to reply. Albanese knew 3 hours beforehand (Joyce again) that Qantas was about to pull the plug and ground flights, but he did nothing. Albanese was also informed 2 weeks ago about Qantas' financial situation with regards to the Union demands, so he at least had a heads-up on why Qantas was behaving the way it was. Unions are an outdated anachronism (and still welded on to the ALP), fighting for unrealistic demands in a real world. Still it will be interesting to see what the independent tribunal makes of all of this.

Joyce wanted the Government to declare the industrial action illegal. They could have done that as part of the Fair Work Act. However, that part of the legislation was quite controversial and almost certainly would have led to months of legal argument and further uncertainty. If I was on the board and my CEO advocated this action it would be his last action as CEO as it is so clearly against the shareholders interests.

Simply put, the only one party without blame here is the Government.

 

[scottmac]

The unions have done exactly as they should - tried to negotiate

They quite clearly have not negotiated. They are blocking what they see (which in all due respect is for the benefit of the Aust. employee) as unfair. But for Qantas to grow and thrive it needs to move some of its operations offshore and become entrenched in Asia which will be if it isn't already the busiest sector in regards to air traffic. It will not happen with the current set up and that in the long term is detrimental to Qantas and therefore Aust jobs. Unions should not be able to dictate how a company plans to run its operations. If it was only a wage dispute it would have been sorted long ago.

Hands up how many people fly Qantas to away games? Too expensive did you say? Virgin and Jetstar are cheaper?



Wonder why?

 

[pjennings]

They quite clearly have not negotiated. They are blocking what they see (which in all due respect is for the benefit of the Aust. employee) as unfair. But for Qantas to grow and thrive it needs to move some of its operations offshore and become entrenched in Asia which will be if it isn't already the busiest sector in regards to air traffic. It will not happen with the current set up and that in the long term is detrimental to Qantas and therefore Aust jobs. Unions should not be able to dictate how a company plans to run its operations. If it was only a wage dispute it would have been sorted long ago.

Hands up how many people fly Qantas to away games? Too expensive did you say? Virgin and Jetstar are cheaper?



Wonder why?

It is quite true that the Australian flying public is voting with their feet and going to cheaper airlines. Your point is also valid that in the long term that the current cost structure will not be able to be sustained. However, what was the reason for the escalation on the weekend. Was it the procavative ties? Was it the rhetoric of two Liberal premmiers on one day followed by the leader of the opposition the following day calling for the governemnt to step in? Was it that Qantas had already booked thousands of hotel rooms to accomodate passengers earlier in the week and had to use them?

The unions and Qantas could have taken the steps the government did anytime in the last eighteen months. The government acted within hours.

I suspect that Qantas has done more to damage their brand in the last 72 hours than the unions have during their campaign. It really seems to have been an irrational act. They say their actions have cretaed certainty. However, the same certainty could have been achieved approaching Fair Work Australia - just as the Govenmnet did - without the inconvenince to thousands of customers and the hit to the brand and ultimately the shareholders.

 

[dibo]

From The Australian:

In its ruling, the tribunal found it was "unlikely that the protected industrial action taken by the three unions, even taken together, is threatening to cause significant damage to the tourism and air transport industries".
"The response to industrial action of which Qantas has given notice, if taken, threatens to cause significant damage to the tourism and air transport industries and indirectly to industry generally because of the effect on consumers of air passenger and cargo services," it said after a marathon 12-hour hearing.

 

[hasbeen]

From today's SMH

"The opposition tried to blame the dispute on the government, saying that as soon as Qantas told it at 2pm on Saturday of its planned action, the government should have invoked section 431 of the Fair Work Act, which would have immediately terminated the dispute and kept planes in the air.

Instead, the government used section 424, which sent the matter to an emergency hearing of Fair Work Australia.

Ms Gillard said this had been necessary because the tribunal's termination had forced the parties to resolve their differences and prevented any more industrial action.

Had she used section 431, which is a ministerial directive, it would be open to a court challenge and ''a path of never-ending legislation'', she said."

So she doesn't even have faith in the Act which she herself drafted.

 

[dibo]

She referred it to the umpire rather than kicking qantas. Why is that unreasonable? Why create a precedent when the response was quite effective and got exactly the same result, minus a difficult and protracted fight in the Federal Court.

It makes sense to lean on the tried and tested.

 

[hasbeen]

Well then, if you are scared of it setting a precedent or it being challenged, why draft it at all?

 

[dibo]

Well then, if you are scared of it setting a precedent or it being challenged, why draft it at all?

for circumstances where you can confidently pound one union or business for unreasonable industrial action competely without the risk of putting an entire multi-billion dollar industry through a plate glass window.