While sympathetic, you obviously chose the wrong airline. This dispute has been going on for months now, and in my opinion, anyone who chose to book with them in that period was flirting with the risk of disruption. Why put yourself in that situation?I missed an old friends funeral because of a cancelled flight a couple of weeks ago.
Missing a very good mates engagement tonight.
I would really like to know what the total cost of the package over the life of the agreement that the unions are fighting for is, compared to the loss that Qantas is experiencing on a daily basis now. Surely there must be a point in time, a tipping point, when it is no longer worth Qantas holding out? Maybe that point has already passed, which explains the bloody-minded attitude of Joyce?
I would also like to know how the dispute got to this level. There must have been an unwillingness, a disinterest even, to negotiate amicably over the years by one of the parties. Whichever side it was.
In all seriousness and looking at other occupations and the level of responsibility involved, I'd value the true worth of the Qantas CEO at $30 per hour. He's a trouble making dud pure and simple. Worth a bit more than a truly unskilled worker perhaps, he does have some skills, but nowhere near as valuable as someone who can actually fly a plane or even fix one. He clearly lacks the ability to resolve conflict, indeed he seems to be doing the exact opposite.
I know you're an expert on management responsibility and consider the QANTAS CEO is worth little more than a baggage handler, but perhaps you should consider that the owners of QANTAS, the shareholders, of which I am one, voted overwhelming at the General Meeting to give Joyce a pay rise.
My experience with unions tells me that it takes rather a lot to actually start a dispute and that they aren't usually completely one sided.
It reminds me of a far simpler situation as follows. In short, workers used to drive company cars home each day. Then management decided that this was not an entitlement so they would end commuter use of vehicles. The bottom line is that it ended up costing more to lease overnight parking space than it used to cost to have employees drive them home. Needless to say the unions got involved and this is a classic example of defective management - wasting money and upsetting the unions as well for zero gain to the company.
Things like that happen an awful lot, and I suspect the Qantas issue has more to do with management trashing the Qantas brand than anything about wages and conditions. I could be wrong, but the entire management strategy seems to involve a race to the bottom - something that other airlines are already moving away from because it isn't overly profitable.
Three points:
1. Shutting down the Airline rather than continue to deal with the unions through negotiation and/or arbitration is cutting off your nose to spite your face. The international damage to the brand name is already growing;
2. When Corrigan, at Patrick, engaged in illegal activities in an attempt to destroy the waterfront unions, the truth eventually emerged from under the Reith spin and the High Court found in favour of the workers. Were is Corrigan now? and
If the Qantas board is so determined to move off shore, it may succed
You miss the point many others including on this forum have made about the workplace and management culture.
1.3 Location of Principal Operational Centre
Of the facilities, taken in aggregate, which are used by Qantas in the provision of scheduled international air transport services (for example, facilities for the maintenance and housing of Aircraft, catering, marketing, flight operations, training and administration), the facilities located in Australia, when compared with those located in any other country, must represent the principal centre of operations of Qantas.[Qantas Sale Act s.7(1)(h)]
No you miss the point.
Are you sure it's not the pain of your investment decision bias clouding your judgement!?
While I don't have much time for unions generally or the TWU in particular, one has to be able to see through your prejudices and bias to assess what is really happening.
you have a right to your opinion but personally I would not hand a pay rise to someone who appears to be ruining the company. If he really does have some brilliant strategy as supporters will no doubt claim, then pay him after he has successfully pulled off whatever he hopes to achieve not beforehand.I know you're an expert on management responsibility and consider the QANTAS CEO is worth little more than a baggage handler, but perhaps you should consider that the owners of QANTAS, the shareholders, of which I am one, voted overwhelming at the General Meeting to give Joyce a pay rise.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?