QANTAS Grounds all Flights

[LifeChoices]

There is no "U" in QANTAS

 

[noco]

There is no "U" in QANTAS

NO!

Queensland and Northern Territory Air Services. It originated in Longreach.

 

[sails]

There is no "U" in QANTAS

Do you mean like no "U" in labor?...

I don't know why there is no "U" in labor: but QANTAS stands for "Queensland And Northern Territory Aerial Services" and it's easier to type without the original fullstops between every letter...

Here's some history on Q.A.N.T.A.S. from the Qantas Founders Museum: http://www.qfom.com.au/

PS - sorry Noco, you beat me to it...

 

[noco]

Fair Work Australia with some 8 ex union bosses running the show would be like putting 8 foxes to look after the chickens.

Call that fair????????????????????????????

Typical of this Green/Labor Government.

 

[Smurf1976]

Much blame is being blamed on to Joyce's decision to ground all aircraft, but I notice that there is little said of the union dispute that was already causing delays and cancelled flights. I heard that Qantas passengers were down around 25% due to industrial action.

I think you'll find that much of that drop was due to passengers simply not booking flights in the first place rather than due to planned flights being cancelled by union action.

 

[Whiskers]

From what I have heard, whiskers, the ruling gives a negotiation period. Then if no resolution is found a binding order will be made by FWA. I can't see how the union will not be creamed, unless the Government is prepared to fund the union demands.

The press commentary is mixed and somewhat confusing. That's why I posted the main extract from the FWA order and the link to the full order. Here it is again. http://www.fwa.gov.au/decisionssigned/html/2011fwafb7444.htm

With regard to FWA deciding the matter, the following extract is what FWA said.

[17] Termination does provide an opportunity for further negotiation during a period of 21 days, extendable for a further 21 days, if the parties agree that progress is being made. Fair Work Australia will be available to assist the parties during post-industrial action negotiating period.
​

To recap what I and others have tried to explain... The only application before FWA was the one by the gov under s 424... to terminate or suspend protected industrial action by both parties for 90 days. The exact text from FWA is as follows;

[1] The Minister has made application for an order under s.424 of the Fair Work Act 2009 terminating, or in the alternative suspending for a period of 90 days, protected industrial action being engaged in and/or threatened impending or probable by Qantas Airways Ltd (Qantas), QCatering Limited (QCatering), The Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association (ALAEA), Transport Workers’ Union of Australia (TWU) and the Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA). We refer to Qantas and QCatering collectively as Qantas.
​

As things stand, FWA has and can only rule on terminating or suspending protected Industrial action under s424.

It will need an application by someone else for FWA to settle the log of claims for the new enterprise agreement.

I would guess with the FWA ruling to terminate all industrial action, it will
give Joyce the breathing space required to fast track the changes adopted at the
A.G.M.

The unions have probably just accelerated the speed with which Joyce will
introduce the changes.

I'm curious... what changes do you think Joyce can and will fast track?

I think Joyce achieved his primary objective which was to have all strike action stopped so as to create some certainty for Qantas customers.

You probably missed the highlighted bit in a previous post where Joyce said an in a written press release that 'the lock out will continue until the unions drop their extreme demands'.

Joyce's lockout was ordered to be terminated as the gov sought, the union protected industrial action is terminated for the time being... but the 'extreme' demands of the unions still remain.

The current order doesn't mean the unions can never take industrial action again. On the contrary, FWA stated in it's decision that it cannot prevent any party from taking legal industrial action... except in exceptional circumstances as s424.

[14] There is a need to balance this issue against the fact that protected industrial action is permissible under our system and has been now for many years and has been taken relatively frequently in the airline industry with successive bargaining rounds. It is also important that encouragement of enterprise bargaining is also part of the system. In that respect, what we have heard indicates there are still prospects for a satisfactory negotiated outcome in all three cases. The prospect of a negotiated resolution in relation to the three proposed enterprise agreements still remains.
​

The FWA decision actually said the union action was not a significant threat to the Aus economy, rather the action by Qantas was. The relevant paragraph from the decision:

[10] It is 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 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. The Qantas evidence was that the cost to it alone is $20 million per day.

​

I'm not too much concerned about what the final resolution of the union log of claims for the enterprise agreement will be, but rather;

1. the disharmony between staff and senior management at Qantas and the damage to our national carrier, and
2. the apparent efforts by Joyce to keep the benefits of being the national carrier, but reneg on the obligations of being the national carrier as prescribed by the Qantas act... in particular to keep most of it's employment, and operations based in Aus.

If Joyce wants to be a cheap international carrier shifting it's operations around the world to where it can do it cheapest, then he ought to set up or buy an overseas airline. The simple fact is Qantas has a mandate to be the Aus national carrier first and foremost.

The gov has decided we need a national carrier and Qantas was it as a nationalised airline. However the gov floated off Qantas in the early 1990's under the Qantas Sale Act. Everyone knew what was required of and by Qantas under the terms of the privatisation.

To recap some history provided earlier in smurfs posts, Qantas got fat and lazy with a huge market share after the demise of Ansett. Virgin in particular has given stiff competition and is seriously eating into that market share.

Qantas and Joyce have resorted to a lot of measures which may be in contravention of the Act. The main sticking point with the current negotiations is to do with security of employment.

Joyce obviously doesn't want to commit to that so they can continue to outsource and base more operations offshore arguably in contravention of the Qantas Sale Act that created it's private entity.

 

[sptrawler]

Obviously from what you are saying whiskers, the industrial action can commence again. It will be interesting to see what Joyce and the boys do if it does recommence.
Maybe they will put the Qantas brand on the market, then focus more on Jetstar.
Just a thought.

 

[Bintang]

Finally I do not think unkindly of Joyce's pay rise. That was the incentive to get results.
joea

Actually I wasn't making a judgement about the amount of the pay rise but I do think the timing of it was impeccably stupid.

 

[todster]

It's a pity we can't have Asian stewardesses on Qantas planes in Australia. If Cathay and Singapore Airlines are anything to go by they run rings around our old dogs, in both appearance and service. They are also friendlier.

Pop over to Bangkok mate get yourself one if you fancy them that much.
Plenty of old blokes doin it

 

[todster]

Pop over to Bangkok mate get yourself one if you fancy them that much.
Plenty of old blokes doin it

Few young ones too

 

[drsmith]

[1] The Minister has made application for an order under s.424 of the Fair Work Act 2009 terminating, or in the alternative suspending for a period of 90 days, protected industrial action being engaged in and/or threatened impending or probable by Qantas Airways Ltd (Qantas), QCatering Limited (QCatering), The Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association (ALAEA), Transport Workers’ Union of Australia (TWU) and the Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA). We refer to Qantas and QCatering collectively as Qantas.
​

As things stand, FWA has and can only rule on terminating or suspending protected Industrial action under s424.

Inder items 15 and 16 as provided in one of your earlier posts, I would say FWA chose termination.

That's how it reads to me.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23670&p=667165&viewfull=1#post667165

 

[Wysiwyg]

Joyce seems to have been a bullying victim at school and is living out his revenge in the business world. He will leave Q or get the toss next year.

 

[Calliope]

Fair Work Australia with some 8 ex union bosses running the show would be like putting 8 foxes to look after the chickens.

Call that fair????????????????????????????

Typical of this Green/Labor Government.

Fair? It must be. Julia calls it an independent umpire. And what's more she says it with a straight face. Have you noticed her nose is getting longer?

 

[sptrawler]

Joyce seems to have been a bullying victim at school and is living out his revenge in the business world. He will leave Q or get the toss next year.

I doubt it, he would have to have put his job on the line to make the grounding call.
If it had backfired and the FWA had only suspended strike action and ordered Qantas to recommence services. He would have lost his n#ts and be out of a job already.

 

[Boggo]

Hard to argue with the general leaning of this commentary I guess...
http://heathenscripture.wordpress.com/2011/10/31/tie-the-kangaroo-down-joyce/

 

[tinhat]

Hard to argue with the general leaning of this commentary I guess...
http://heathenscripture.wordpress.com/2011/10/31/tie-the-kangaroo-down-joyce/

That was a very entertaining read.

 

[sptrawler]

This whole argument is a bit silly, we complain that Joyce wants to move jobs offshore to be competitive, but we want cheap airfares.
Well maybe he should say, we will keep everything as it is, but you have to pay more.(then they go broke real quick)
I think there is more of an issue with foreign ownership of our agricultural and residential land.

 

[sptrawler]

Actually, I wonder how many of the people that are saying Joyce is wrong for wanting to move jobs offshore to reduce costs.
Are themselves buying products over the internet, which in turn is costing jobs in the retail sector.
It is a complex issue to make your dollar go further, but not sacrifice your job.
I wonder how many baggage handlers make a point of buying Australian when they go to Bunnings?

 

[Calliope]

Actually, I wonder how many of the people that are saying Joyce is wrong for wanting to move jobs offshore to reduce costs.
Are themselves buying products over the internet, which in turn is costing jobs in the retail sector.
It is a complex issue to make your dollar go further, but not sacrifice your job.
I wonder how many baggage handlers make a point of buying Australian when they go to Bunnings?

Those posters on this thread who said they wouldn't pay Joyce more than a baggage handler have been quiet lately. Washing the egg off their faces I suppose. Joyce certainly outsmarted Gillard and her union buddies.

Ties that bind: how Alan Joyce called Labor's bluff
BY: PETER VAN ONSELEN, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR From: The Australian November 01, 2011 12:00AM

IF Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce wanted Julia Gillard to intervene and force arbitration - always his preferred option to the fleet being grounded while Fair Work Australia spent two days poring over evidence - it begs the question: why didn't he simply flag that option with the government before acting as he did? The answer, I have no doubt, is because Joyce could not be sure the government wouldn't tell the union movement about his intentions, stealing the element of surprise.

Who can blame him for such a calculation. Many Labor MPs previously held senior positions in the union movement, including the ministers with portfolio responsibilities affecting Qantas. The PM only remains where she is, despite poor polls, because of the backing of union figures such as AWU national secretary Paul Howes.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...led-labors-bluff/story-e6frgd0x-1226181922733

 

[sptrawler]

I just watched the pilots association rep on lateline. He had a lot of trouble answering pretty basic questions to justify the pilots position.
I hope he does a better job in his presentation to an impartial umpire.

By the way I never have nor never will have airline shares in my portfolio.