The decision by Qantas yesterday to ground its entire felt as its next move in an industrial dispute with several unions is appalling. In a week when shareholders delivered a 66% pay rise to their CEO, the CEO and Qantas board have decided to disrupt and financially harm tens of thousands of businesses and hundreds of thousands of passengers instead of showing leadership by working through the dispute.
I don’t care for the excuses of Alan Joyce. There is no excuse for disrupting business in this way, none whatsoever.
Joyce announced the grounding late on Saturday. How are businesses supposed to respond overt the weekend to make over arrangements for Monday? My newsagency software company usually has between six and ten people on return flights every week, myself included. Our small business has been significantly disrupted. We have extra costs. Thanks Qantas. Alan Joyce has his 66% and the bully boys of the board think they are making their point. Makes me feel like they don’t care.
In my view, the point Qantas is making is we don’t like the game so we are taking everything and going home. This is the sort of behaviour parents hope their kids grow out of.
The Qantas boards should grow up. They should have realised the damage of giving their CEO 66% while refusing a fraction of this to others would create difficulties.
I have many clients and friends in the tourism industry. They are gutted by this move. Travellers due to arrive this week will not arrive. These business are still recovering from the impact of cyclones and a tough economy.
Why Qantas would wreak a man-made tsunami on business, especially small business and the tourism sector, is beyond me. Sure, they will say they are doing this for the good of the airline, to protect shareholder value. I don’t believe that line.
I have no doubt that the unions lodged ambit claims. They usually do. Negotiations need to be approached with this knowledge. That said, as a frequent flyer I want the people flying the plane to be happy and well paid as my safety depends on it.
My travel plans this week are disrupted and while I have been able to make arrangements with Virgin for two flights, I have two more flights which are proving to be a challenge to resolve. The time spent already has a cost which I am sure Qantas will not are about.
Besides the disruption and cost to passengers and business, there is the damage to brand Australia. My sense is that it will be considerable.
The Qantas action certainly leaves me wondering where this move fits in their longer term plans for the airline. I also wonder if there is a political motive.
As a Qantas Platinum level frequent flyer I am appalled at the decision by Qantas. I do not support it at all.
I notice that Alan Joyce has been in the media today with all manner of excuses including that they chose to ground the fleet yesterday, and not another day, for safety reasons. Nonsense.
I’ll close with a quote from Ita Buttrose. This is what she tweeted on twitter yesterday:
Leaders lead by example; Alan Joyce should have said no to a pay rise this week. Very disappointed in the Qantas board and its chairman.
Please excuse me for being off topic with this post.
This is just another example of a CEO getting paid too much money and forgetting about his customers! He is devaluing an iconic brand and leaving Qantas wide open for take-over.
You also have to wonder whether the damage this narrow minded idiot has caused can be reversed? Is this the end of Qantas?
Being a person who is flying with Q. next Saturday this could effect me. Being a person who is an industry that is sold off to international companies cause we could not compete with our costs against Asian competitors I can kind of see where this could end up. That said the $ paid to Joyce is mindblowing. The question could be can we afford to keep an Aussie owned airline and pay the wages all staff want or will the airline be like so many other companies in other industries and be sold off.
K.B. My understanding is that the actual wages claim is not that crazy. Qantas has not paid a dividend in two years yet Joyce got a 66% pay rise.
Their action yesterday is damaging the brand, our country and businesses here.
Mark
Ita’s remarks are spot on, however you are a little bit off the mark (pardon the pun).
Alan Joyce’s pay increase is performance-based, meaning if he doesn’t perform, he doesn’t get it. The latter may also come with a bullet clause.
The general public does not know the full details of the unions’ latest demands. They were obviously serious enough for Joyce to take the action he did, and for the federal government to get involved.
As I understand it, the unions have been agitating since 2007 when Qantas, under a previous CEO, ordered 100 new aircraft to replace its fleet of ageing 747s. Those new planes were supposed to have started arriving in 2008 and, because they require vastly different maintenance facilities than Qantas then had, the order led to the decision to enter into an offshore maintenance contract with Lufthansa and progressively close its engineering facilities in Australia.
Under the contract with Boeing, 10 of the new fleet of 100 planes should have been delivered each year since 2008, so Qantas should already have about 40 of the new aircraft. So far it has none. By rights Boeing’s delay should also have delayed the commencement of offshore maintenance of its existing fleet and therefore the closure of Qantas’s Australian maintenance facilities.
Where were the demands from Qantas passengers and shareholders in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 to keep these facilities open? Where was the support then for Qantas’s licenced engineers, pilots and workers? Nowhere. It was dismally absent.
Yes, the Qantas shutdown is inconveniencing many thousands of passengers. Yes, the decision was swift, but crises always warrant swift action. I repeat, the ‘man in the street’ does not know the full nature of the unions’ demands. Hypothetically, one demand might be the re-instating of onshore maintenance until a substantial number of the new aircraft have been delivered, while another might be the re-employment of some of the specialist 747 engineers that have been let go. A third could be the establishment of a maintenance facility in Australia to service the fleets of new aircraft operated by multiple airlines (as Cathay Pacific, Lufthansa and others have done overseas) to ensure continuity of employment for Australian workers.
When is someone ever ‘just a passenger’ or ‘just a shareholder’? If Qantas truly is a valued Aussie icon, shouldn’t it have been supported with minds and voices as well as wallets and credit cards? Where were ‘just the passengers and shareholders’ when the people that make up Qantas needed them?
This is not the time to cry over spilt milk or to take sides based on sparse knowledge of the facts.
At what may be the 11th hour, careful consideration of all the facts resulting in wise decisions being made about the best way forward for Qantas are needed, which is now the province of Fair Work Australia. Meanwhile Qantas passengers, shareholders and the general public should learn from this situation and not be complacent about lending their enthusiastic support for something important as soon as it is needed next time.
To end on a positive note, one industry’s crisis is often a bonanza for many other industries. In this case vehicle hire, railways, interstate bus lines, telephone and video conferencing, and holidays at home. Increased local spending is domestic tourism of another kind, and an opportunity exists for suburbs and towns across Australia to promote their highlights as ‘Get to know your old home town week’.
Just my take on the situation.
Istvan, No, I don’t have the facts of the union demands not do I have the facts of the Qantas position.
There is nothing which I could consider justifies the Qantas action of shutting down the whole airline. Their without arming action is seeing businesses large and small, individuals and our country paying a high price for their game of brinksmanship.
My understanding is that Joyce’s performance package has been made easier to achieve in the face of the value of Qantas declining.
I have been a Qantas supporter since the (sad) demise of Ansett. I have put my money where my mouth is. I feel let down not only because of the overall action but because Qantas has not even contacted me about my flight at 6am on Wednesday from Cairns. There has been no apology to my business which spends hundreds of thousands of dollars a year on domestic travel.
Alan Joyce and the Qantas board have got it wrong. They not doing business in a way with which I am comfortable.
I’m sort of with Istvan here. This morning on Insiders and again on Inside
Business the Qantas issue was discussed
and on Inside Business the discussion was
given over almost entirely to an interview with Alan Joyce who said that the reported
increase in his salary was indeed a “catchup” on salary recouped over the last 3 years and that he was not in control of that – the Qantas board decide that outcome.
Obviously the board must have known what
was happening at their AGM last week and chose not to share the info with the shareholders (why should they).
I think it is a result of greed – the almighty dollar – where Australians believe they should be paid more and more for doing less and less.
If we are not competetive in a global market why are we being thrust into it by our leaders?
They must believe that we need to trade globally to survive but here in the Asian region we are surrounded by people who work for almost no wages and the competition is getting stronger and stronger from these regions by these people, for our jobs.
We can’t stand alone here in the middle of
the Pacific ocean all alone with our “high wages and demands” while right next door
there are well-educated people ready to take our jobs from us.
I feel for Alan Joyce – I don’t believe any employer deliberately tries to “do over” his
employees but if we all let our employees “run the show” where would the
corporations be right now.
There should have been give and take and there wasn’t so Joyce pulled the plug on what he saw as an ongoing problem which
was no nearer to a solution than 2 years ago so he obviously thinks that now that there is no impasse the government will be
stepping in (there is a meeting today) and
the two sides will be forced into some form
of co-operation with each other which is, surely, a good thing and takes away the uncertainty that the unions have created in
the workplace.
By the way, a baggage handler at Qantas received approx $60k per annum.
I wish I was a baggage handler!!!!!!!
We need to look at ourselves and our national pride.
Aussies don’t want to work in hospitality or
drive taxis or do any more of the so called
menial jobs so we shouldn’t whinge when other people are willing to do them for less.
Having said all the above I might be less magnanimous should I be trying to go to the Melbourne Cup on Tuesday!
June I rate Alan Joyce as brilliant at spin. I don;t believe him. I also don’t believe the lines being put out by the various unions. What I do know is that the airline did not need to be grounded. The impact economically and socially is too great a price to pay.
Sorry Mark, your responses are confusing. At 5 you said you don’t have the facts of the union demands nor do you have the facts of the Qantas position, yet at 7 you said you know that the airline did not need to be grounded. Did the ouija board tell you that or what?
At 5 you also say you have put your money where your mouth yet you only mention your wallet. Fair enough, but when did you open your mouth and add your support to those agitating Qantas for better decisions in the past 4 years?
As for Qantas contacting you about your flight on Wednesday, you know all flights are grounded until further notice. Until Fair Work Australia has made its decision, what more could Qantas communicate to you? Premium level or cattle class, all passengers are in the same boat on this one. Qantas will no doubt communicate with all its passengers when it actually has something to say.
Also at 5 you say that businesses large and small, individuals and our country are paying a high price. How is this so? Freight is still being carried and, as previously mentioned, other forms of domestic travel are available. Face to face business meetings are postponed every day of other weeks of the year, and urgent matters can be dealt with by phone or video conferencing. I’m sure Ita Buttrose would agree that real leaders must demonstrate flexibility when required. Just re-schedule your meetings and consider your health by keeping your stress for something you can fix!
I am, of course, mindful that some passengers are genuinely being adversely affected, e.g. those travelling to a loved one’s funeral, or other important personal or business event which cannot be postponed.
Good discussion, Istvan and June and Mark.
Qantas needs to get it’s Asian hub organised to be a big player in asia for the next 30 yrs. It can only do that at asian wages, in an asian location and being the airline it is, will strive I expect for current high level safety standards. It will keep a small Aussie workforce and service Oz flights here as it always has, but if it is to have a future, it is in Asia. I own no Qantas shares, but if Joyce pulls this off, I may buy some. Joyce may be making his corporate reputation here. I recall Reagan and the Air Traffic Controllers in USA 1981 – Julia is no Reagan. The discussion about Joyce’s salary and benefits are a minor side issue
I quote from another blog :
When negotiations are not working,
Fairwork allows Unions to take protected action (strikes etc) to damage the company’s business, and the Company is allowed to Lock out to stop said damage and remind employees that their jobs are on the line.
We’ve had quite a few good years without strike action and upheaval, but guess what, back to the 70’s industrial unrest is all on the front burner now. PLAN FOR IT.
Which came first, the employee or the
employer ? When is the next election?
I feel most sorry for the “glorified bus drivers”
Istvan your job as a PR hack for Qantas must pay well for you to be working today. Your responses are drenched in the Qantas spin. Mark’s responses are not confusing at all, unless you want to make them out to be.
i support Alan, i think those who support the strikes should be sacked and new qantas bases in singapore is very good prospect. do you want Qanats to survive or 2nd Ansett??? i think the wages here is damn high , how can you beat singapore or middle eastern airlines?
Baggage handlers get paid upwards of 20 per cent above the industry rate and earn between $70,000 to $85,000 a year including penalty rates but not overtime. Overtime is paid at double time as are any public holiday. If you get called in to work by choice when rostered off, regardless of the time spent at work, you get paid a minimum four hours at double time.
In addition, Qantas baggage handlers get significantly discounted domestic and international air travel and five weeks annual leave.
Oh and Alan Joyce earned more as CEO JetStar and his predesessor at Qantas was paid $10M a year.
Im not going to take sides nor am I suggesting a solution, decisions have been made but the public should be aware of the facts as well.
Istvan, It’s my view that Qantas has acted disproportionately in this matter. I reject your spin. The grounding of the entire fleet has resulted in an extraordinary cost, financial and emotional, to passengers and businesses. This cost will continue for some time – just speak to anyone who operates a tourism business which relies on fly in tourists.
The grounding was a shock. This alone suggests that either it was an over-reaction or that Qantas had not appropriately communicated with travellers and the public on the industrial dispute leading up to it.
Brett, what the baggage handlers get paid is no reason to shutdown an airline and harm businesses and individuals as the grounding action has done.
There is a scenario which could well make all of these comments moot. Without taking a conspiracy theory too far, consider this:
There is already an offer to sell Qantas – at price.
It is already arranged that management needs to influence the market to get the shares to this price point.
Same management already has a new salary level from which to have their exit package calculated
Now, imagine that Qantas is a newsagent.
Employee #1 wants a 15% payrise over 3 years with no mentioned of increased productivity.
Employee #2 wants you only to employ people who are members of a union.
Employee #3 wants free newspapers and magazines to take home, as well has have family & friends access to your staff room to have free tea & coffee, and raid the bikkie jar.
Employee #4 wants a say on how you restructure your business as you try and reduce costs.
Any of these 4 employees have over the past 10 months, walked off the job and left customers waiting at the counter, without concern for their service. Any they still threaten you that they could walk off the job at a moments notice until their demands are met.
What would YOU do?
You can cave into their demands and risk going broke. OR, stand up to them and call their bluff. Close the store, arrange your customers to purchase goods elsewhere (like your subbies), and force these rogue employees to get a grip on reality.
Oh, and they also want a say on how much YOU get paid.
Qantas’ unionised employees are doing to the airline exactly what Ansett employees did to theirs. Where are they now?
How realistic are these people when they threaten Qantas management and their families personal harm if their demands are not met?
A. Joyce and the Qantas Board should be congratulated for making a stand.
Darren all of the post mortems I have read about the death of Ansett point to financial mismanagement by the Air NZ management.
Jeff at 11
Very funny, you meant PR hack for one of the unions, surely!
I’m not a unionist BUT.
Wages have have been on a downward spiral since the 70’s yet CEO etc are now paid multi millions.
As retail business people we all know that retail is flat at best and we all want people to spend more – particularly in our newsagency – but we think they all get paid too much. Something doesn’t make sense.
If we are not carefull we will end up a 3rd world country due to continual off shoring of jobs. 10 or 16% of American out of work depending which figures you want to take. 40 million on food stamps. But hey lets follow their lead, after all we always do and they always get it right.
Fair pay for fair work – and please spend it in my shop.
Mark,
As inconvenient as your interrupted travel plans may be in the very short term, what would be the longer term implications if, like Ansett, Qantas was to disappear completely one day without warning? I daresay a few interrupted meetings or a day or two extra layover is insignificant when compared to an additional 30,000 or so direct and and over 50,000 in-direct jobs were to go in one fell swoop. I do not necessarily think Joyce made the right decision, but he is allowed to protect his business at whatever cost to the public and his company that may be.
You have spoken previously about landlords being dictatorial in their demands and newsagencies leaving (for better or worse financially) which would have an inconvenience to suppliers, customers, other retailers etc, but it is the bad landlords fault. Here it is QANTAS packing up, and yet you find for the Unions (landlords), not the newsagency (QANTAS) to be at fault. Is this because of your direct impact and inconvenience or because of something else?
Darren, to a large degree you stole my thunder. It is always enlightening to look at these situations as though it was our business being disrupted. However, the action QANTAS tripped itself up on was the inconsiderate short notice to their customers.
I’m sure that the promised lockout would have been enough to result in Fairworks involvement and if not this would have placed the responsibility in the hands of the government which clearly was trying to avoid any involvement. QANTAS had to take this action but badly let down their customers and associated businesses with the manner and timing of the immediate grounding of it’s fleet.
We have a culture in this country of the unions dictating to the employer which particularly in a global economy, is detrimental to the longer term interest of their members.
Darren….I agree with you but is does not explain why Qantas chose to give less than 24 hours notice when they could have achieved the same oucome by giving seven days notice….thus giving their customers greater opportunity to change their plans?
On a side note…why is a contrary argument on this thread declared “spin”?
The key point for me in all this is that Qantas overreacted. I have no sense of an escalation to the point that shutting the airline down was warranted.
On some other points:
I have found for no one in terms of the issues between Qantas and the unions.
The unions are not landlords.
The cost of the shutdown are far greater on our economy than the cost of the industrial action.
I agree that business owners need to have the capacity to run their businesses. However, they need to exercise this power with due care.
Funny how we all see things difrferently.
I agree the public were hurt but where were the Federal Government in all this. They knew it was going to happen.
Passengers – sorry – yes
Unions – no
They want outdated practices and retention of job security. Tell me a job where there is 100% guarantee security these days ?
What right have they to tell Qantas how to run their business and why has it taken some nine months to get to this stage.
The Unions are blood sucking components of an orchetstrated attack on the Company.
I back Joyce any day and all the time.
Go Qantas adminsitration for your guts to do this. This Country is weak Federally and weak when it comes to effective follow through.
David – you have hit the nail on the head – where was the redhead and her gutless ilk when all this was brewing?
Too bloody scared of the union movement to use the power vested in them yet all too prepared to knock Qantas and Joyce when it hit the fan.
And then she has the hide to declare to the leaders of an insignificant movement that Australia is embarrassed and shamed by Qantas’ actions.
Too right – she should be embarrassed – not at the actions of the airline but at her government’s inactivity and preparedness to let this happen.
No one likes what happened, least of all those directly affected but how long do campaigns of bastardry such as that carried out by the unions have to go on before the inevitable happens?
Qantas – 1,
Unions – Nil,
Gillard – minus 10
on this one.
and Virgin +100 I gather, they have taken up the slack at a moments notice and won plenty of kudos all around.
My sister flew Bris to Mellb with Virgin last Wed and left her reading glasses on the pocket in front of her seat. When she boarded to return on Sat arvo, Virgin had her glasses for her. AND, she had changed her original Fri return to Sat in the meantime.
Shutting the airline was unnecessary and the sort of action I would expect from a bully. No the unions have not covered themselves in glory. BUT the counter action by qantas was over the top.
Blaming the government? get real fellas! It was the Gillard process which saw this resolved overnight. But you guys could not bring yourselves to say that.
Helen
Marks blog made valid points and provoked healthy arguments. Some of the responses have been irrational and unreasonable – even vitriolic.
Your response however is completely sensible
But Helen its got the result that Qantas wanted (termination of right to strike until a new bargining process is started) which was the only one that was acceptable to them.
A mate of mine who’s a senior HR at a very large multinational company was saying that the unions were well aware that this may have been an outcome but that they didn’t expect Joyce would be tough enough to actually pull the trigger. Guess he proved them wrong which will put him in a much stronger bargaining position next time round. What will also occur now in all likelihood is that other big companies may put the same card on the table if they have wage negotiation issues and have the stomach to follow through with the threat.
I think had not Joyce given himself a pay rise in the same week that he initiated this action he would have come out smelling a lot better. Pity I sold all my Qantas shares a little while ago as he may really achieve something in the long term if he can get one over on the unions like this.
Regarding this hurting the Qantas branding, I don’t think the long term effect will be great if anything at all. People buy airline tickets mainly based on price with a secondary consideration of the airlines perceived safety (which is why Aeroflot or Air Garuda are avoided by many travellers like the plague). People will forget about this in 12 months time and the majority will be back on Qantas flights again.
Gillard was hoping the government was going to avoid weighing in at all. If her advisors hadn’t made her aware that this was a possibility that she should have planned for some time ago then they were negligent or plain stupid.
Jim,
At what point should the government intervene? They had not been asked by either Qantas or the unions to do so. Their intervention would have been pre-emptive. It is worth noting that the state governments have the same or similar powers to intervene.
It should also be pointed out that when it “hit the fan” as you put it, the federal government sought intervention through Fair Work to terminate, not suspend the industrial action. This was against the wishes of the three unions involved.
I think it would be hard for many to successfully argue that the actions of Qantas were not over the top. Other options were available to them. That being said, the Unions have acted in a manner no better. They were not negotiating in good faith and their demands are blatantly unreasonable. They do not want to end up in arbitration because they are well aware that the outcome will not return a favourable result.
It must also be noted that the main condition being demanded from the unions is job security not wage rises as some here have suggested.
The tail tried to wag the dog…the dog bit the tail…that hurt both the tail and the dog. Fair summation????
Since when has the Govt waited to be asked to get involved before they bowl in and impose their views on the nation Jarryd? The Govt did not act because it did not want to suffer another legal defeat on it’s industrial relation policy and had no faith in it under the microscope. Gillard stated herself that the policy was untested and she did not want it tested legally.
QANTAS made a decision, good or bad at least it made one without being pushed into it by minorities.
It is disappointing to see people peddling their political and gender biases here. I support the core of Mark’s post, the grounding of the entire fleet was appalling customer service by Qantas. Completely unnecessary based on what had been reported about the dispute up to then.
I say that as a newsagent in a fly-in tourist town which has been affected by the Qantas move. The move itself depresses business.
The sharemarket thinks it was a positive move, short term pain for the longterm good
@Keith (33)
Surely if tourists fly in, they also must fly out. On the assumption your town doesn’t just fill up with tourists.
Shouldn’t there have been just as many tourists stranded as the ones that couldn’t make it in.
If anything I would think that stranded tourists would mean they would be buying newspapers (especially) plus books/magazines to keep entertained.
Helen,
G Gillard did nothing, If she did she would only balls it up.
Luke,
Any legislation that has never been used is subject to being tested via civil action through the courts. This naturally takes time – time that was not available in this circumstance.
In any case the Federa Government did act. It just done so through application to Fair Work. My understanding is that any action they took had to be in relation to the “national interest”. Any action prior to the point at which they made the application may have been struck down by either the courts or Fair Work.
Im not sure what minority groups even have to do with this issue??
The issue is done and dusted it is now history , everyone can fly again and do what ever it is they do . Quantas workers get to go back to work and business is back to usual oh except today because of the damm melbourne cup , half the town has disapeared ,damm it how dare they stop the whole country for a horse racde , oh and by the way if any of youse in melbourne see my horse running around out there i think it is lost .
How interesting – most of us commenting here one way or the other are part of an industry where, it would seem, everyone else is to blame for the ills of the industry be they suppliers, customers, magazine distributors, newspaper publishers, the list goes on. Dare to mention a female politician by name and the comment is apparently sexist, mention the government or the opposition and the comment is apparently political – this industry is so full of apologists and pushers of private agendas that it almost makes me regurgitate.
And now we are apparently expert political commentators.
For an industry “apparently” so full of talent why are we in such diabolical trouble?
Jim,
I don’t believe “redhead” is her name.
Simply mentioning the government or opposition isn’t generally going to get a comment branded “political” … throwing around insults and opinions without evidence to substantiate them will.
The government acted in a timely and appropriate manner in my view.
Qantas, as I have noted, acted inappropriately in my view.
People, you need to look at the bigger picture. This Government is weak and in the Qantas case it did not want to be seen going against the Unions involved for fear it would loose any votes left for a declining Labor Party at the next election.
Despite what anyone says its a fact that Gillard had the opportunity at 2.00pm Saturday to invoke the legislation she eventually agreed to without stopping the planes.
Why didnt she do that ?
Simple – she wanted to grandstand, make a big person of herself to gain brownie points for a Government that is a sinking ship.
Before you tell me to stop bringing Politics into this story stop and think about how deplorable these Unions are. Think about the fact that Gillard only thinks of one thing and thats a red rag to a Bull….
She is a socialist and always will be… God Bless Qantas and their guts to roll the Unions……. I say
David
Your Job is now going to be based in Singapore.
Hope you like it their.
Get a life Derek and look at the Corporate situation.
FYI I am a Newsagent
David,
Had the Federal government invoked the clause that allows them to to directly intervene, it would be subject to a potential legal fight. Given that such legal action could go on for days, weeks or even months – during which time a court may stop the government from exercising the clause – the quickest and safest option was to make an application to Fair Work.
In any case it has already been pointed out that the government DID go against the wishes of the unions in asking for a termination (essentially a one way ticket to determination) instead of a suspension.
Jim, how is this blog any different to any workplace, pub or social gathering in any part of Australia ? No one is pretending to be expert from what I read, they are simply giving an opinion that can be the same or separate from your own but it is because it is Australia that we can have an opinion. If you do not like people having opinions then choose not to read them. If you feel sick then take panadol and have a nap.
Luke,
I took the panadol and had the nap but remain a little confused – I have expressed an opinion and been admonished in the forum – fair enough – but why is my opinion any more or less valid than others.
At the risk of more admonishment, can I also pass comment on David Backholer’s recent posts – HEAR, HEAR!!!
What is disappointing is the disrespect for the Prime Minister. This diminishes the views put in my view.
My position on the matter itself is clear. I think that Qantas overreacted and that they did this for political gain. As a regular traveller and follower of news, I had no sense that shutting the airline was the next step.
As I tweeted on October 30, I do wonder about the briefing for the Leader of the Opposition and the Premiers one VIC and NSW given the curious timing of a change in their statements on Friday.
“What is disappointing is the disrespect for the Prime Minister. This diminishes the views put in my view.”
+ 1.
It’s one thing to have a political view/preference. It is another to use a debate to demean someone in the manner that a few have done here.
I think that what Mark has stated, is correct. The timing of Qantas, in this announcement, was at the very least, VERY disrespectful.
Respect has to be earned which in my opinion it hasn’t. Where was the respect for the Prime Minister when Julia Gillard and colleagues deposed K. Rudd?
By the way, did anyone happen to see any of parliament on the ABC this afternoon? Now that’s disrespect!
Jim,
It is not the act of expressing your opinion that has been admonished. It is the opinion itself.
I would think most here are happy to hear different opinions – so long as those expressing them are prepared to have the content scrutinised. If you believe what you espouse has credible standing then put forward your case with evidence. Without that the discussion will naturally deviate into irrational, emotional discourse.
Beyond the frustration of having flights disrupted as result of the action by Qantas is the four to six week delay in being reimbursed by the company for flights paid for which were cancelled.
Good on ya Luke.
As far as respect for the Prime Minister is concerned that is a two way joke.
I have no resepct for her. She is hopeless and she governs the worst Government this Country has ever seen.
I stand by what I said.
People are entitled to have their say, their opinion and not be lambasted for their views.
I am on your side Jarryd…..You have a common sense approach.
David – Its good that you stand by what you have said which I find just anti sentiment against the Government – You have had stated your case with a number of posts without producing any evidence other than you dislike Julia Gillard and the current Government is the worst etc etc.
Your agressive approach that everyone should agree with you instigated my flippant post to you. They were statement without any substance behind them.
Blaming the Federal Government for not intervening regarding the grounding of a National Airline is ludicruous, it is a dangerous precedent.
It is precipitated by pure greed from a shareholder company that instigated this long running dispute by dangling uneccessary job insecurity fears for the workers, that is the recipe Qantas created and wanted instilled in their employees.
Qantas should at the very least have their “licence” put on review until they show cause why they should have it.
They committed a corporate criminal act and in my opinion should be fined for doing so and the CEO and the board should be called before a senate enquiry to show cause on why they should be allowed to continue with the roles they are in now and what roles they hold in the future.
It was a dispicable act that embarrassed Australia throughout the world. You mentioned the Corporate situation, that is why we and the world are in trouble, driven by pure greed because Corporations will bleed anything and everything dry to make that extra dollar.
Greed by Qantas is the cause of this whole situation.
Of course that is my opinion.
We should be concentrating on our own business I should think David.
Derek,
I have contacted my supplier of “alternative” smokes and he says even he can’t supply what you must be smoking.
A few of us have been accused of drawing long bows in this conservation but your logic, if I may call it that, is mind boggling.
Good on ya Jim
Jim Your Post 47
David Post Your post 53
I think you post need to read your posts regarding championing views and opinions regarding this subject.
This is only part of my take on the situation however its only a view. You both have not proceded to show any evidence other than embarrass yourselves, that is the only clear evidence thus far.
Mr Joyce has been summoned I believe to answer questions at Parliament House by a senate enquiry?
I leave it to you both to respond if you feel the need to as I will not be replying, it has got way out of hand and taken the focus of what this blog is about. Just do not embarass yourselves again please.
I rest my case.
When people lose the plot they get insulting.
Very intelligent.
Derek,
The unions have also been summoned to appear before the same Senate committee so I am not sure why you would only mention Alan Joyce in this context.
and Virgin…
David,
People have a right to their opinion. They certainly don’t however have the right to not be lambasted for that opinion. In fact the opposite is true. If one wishes to have an opinion they ought to be prepared to defend it.
The shock-jock style anti-government rhetoric is sad to see.
Not a single person here has demonstrated why they believe the federal government is at fault. Given the anti-government sentiments of those who hold that view, it appears they blame the government simply because they don’t like them.
Jarryd.
+1
I do believe this is a rare occasion I agree with you… lol
This particular blog seems to have degenerated into a “pro-Qantas” vs “pro-Government” discussion.
There has been as much “shock-jock” comment from one side as the other however it would seem that the few “pro-Qantas” bloggers are being targeted as just that whilst the illogical comments and rhetoric from the other side are ignored (just as well perhaps).
My issue with the Government, and Julia Gillard in particular, is that rather than jump in and resolve/salvage the situation when they had the capability to do so, she and her cohorts chose to let it play out in the forlorn hope that a parliamentary inquiry would hang Alan Joyce for them a’la Pontius Pilate (for the non-Christians among us please read last sentence as “washing one’s hands).
I have not condoned or supported Alan Joyce’s decision but as a victim of union savagery in the past I understand where he is coming from.
To add to your comments Jarryd, no-one has demonstrated why the government isn’t at fault – I suppose the simplistic view is that this isn’t/wasn’t a government issue until someone got caught out sitting on her hands!
Jim,
As i have pointed out in previous comments the federal government was NOT able to step in prior to Qantas announcing the grounding because up until that point there was no “national interest” grounds on which to do so.
As has also been pointed out, very similar if not the same powers are available to state governments. They did not act for the same reason – because they had no grounds on which to do so.
As soon as it became an issue of protecting the “national interest” the government acted and had the issue before Fair Work the same night.
The claim that the federal government wanted to let the issue play out in a parlimentry inquiry is without basis. There was no prior warning that Qantas was about to take such large scale action.
This is so sad when adults cannot see logic.
Alan Joyce is CEO of a Multi National Company. Tell me if you were in his shoes after nine months of bastardisation by so called Unions that you would not do the same as he did.
On Politics- Gillard did not act earlier becsuae if she had have it would have been seen by the Unions as an attack on them and the next election ( that I hope will be in a few months) would have meant less Union votes.
It is all about Politics with Gillard, protecting her Communistic base.
When will people realise that the federal ALP is a basket case. They would not know how to run a chook raffle and make a profit.
From yesterday’s testimony, we know the Qantas was unclear in its messages to government leading up to its decision to ground its entire fleet.
A test for the man in the street on any major government of business decision is whether it seemed reasonable based on what they, the man in the street, knew at the time.
Just as the decision to replace Kevin Rudd as PM was not expected and therefore caused grief for the government of the day, the decision by Qantas was not expected.
Based on the information in the public domain at the time, the airline acted without justification, with arrogance and with litre regard to the passengers.
On the argument that this issue is about politics, I’d say it’s true for both sides. It is a sad reflection of the current political climate.
One only has to look at the ignorant comments by Tony Abbott and joe Hockey about the Government support for the IMF re Europe to realise how far they are prepared to go just to oppose for the sake of opposition.
The IMF and Tony Abbott
Well I agree with Tony Abbott.
Keep our money in Australia and use it on need situations here.
While I am at it. Send the boat people back and tell them that if they want to come to Australia come through the front door.
Stop overseas aid until our Country is fixed up and yeah – no carbon Tax.
And change the Government to one that cares about Australia.
The Qantas decision came as a shock to most because over the years the unions have run riot with no one game enough to step up and call their bluff. The PM showed her colours when she supported unions right to strike but then slammed Qantas for shutting down their own business. Keep things in context it was two days over a weekend, not during the rush as seems to be the unions peak time frame for action. Again the only surprise is that they balls to do it and it worked as it brought action to an end for 21 days and forced the Govt to act against the unions which it hated to do by their attacks on Qantas soon after.
On ya Luke. Spoken like a trooper full of sensible comment.
Just to reiterate – The Unions are the basket case here. They never thought Qantas would do such a thing.
Have you heard of some of the outdated and over the top demands they made on management ?
Let’s re(Joyce) !!!!
David, there is some excellent apolitical commentary on airline management and the sickness inside Qantas which disagrees with you.
Mark
This is what Democracy is all about.
You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine.
I am sticking by mine as I can see the damage that those Unions associated with Qantas were trying to do.
For example – declaring a strike then the day before the strike calling it off AFTER Qantas had re arranged there scgedules.
Demanding that Hangers be built for Planes not even delivered as yet.
Demanding work practices that were out dated 20 years ago.
Demanding Job security when in the year 2011 no one has that “right” as an employee to job security.
Times change and so must we.
No, not a trooper David just someone that can see the other side of the coin and expressing an opinion. Not saying I’m 100% correct but not saying I’m wrong either.
Mark was caught in the mess so fair enough for his opinion but would he sit by and see his business negatively effected by staff over a period of 12-18 months with the threat of a further 12 months of action and do nothing or would he make a business decision as the boss to bring an end to it? god bless people who have differing opinions and are not afraid to express them, or move to a communist country and just wave the red card.
Luke, I think that the claim of business damage by union action has been overstated by Qantas. Airline experts claim that Qantas mismanagement has done many times more damage than the unions.
Go Qantas stick it right up them. We are not Cuba Yet
Derek,
Even aver pointing out the legal inability of the government to intervene you still insist on implying that they could have done so.
You also insist that the did not want to upset the unions, yet this is exactly what the government did when it asked for a termination of industrial action instead of a suspension.
Your continued tea party style anti-government rhetoric does not further the debate in any way.
Yes the unions had unreasonable demands. But that does not mitigate the fact that Qantas had other less destructive options available to it – the least of which was not grounding the airline prior to an intended lockout. Of course the government criticized such overreaching action. They have not once demeaned the right of Qantas to take industrial action, only they particular action they chose.
As for the IMF situation. Our money is better used to assist in preventing a financial crisis than to deal the fallout of one that eventuates.
Jarryd
I think you may have the wrong guy, however I appreciate you trying to get me involved in this post….
David is embarrassing himself again, he now wants to be immigration minister.
Whoops. That’s what happens when I don’t go back through and check what I wrote! 🙂
Luke
I absolutely agree with you, views and opinions are in my view great.
However when someone demands you must agree with a view that is bullying. A rebuttal is served after nearly every view in particular from David.
“This is so sad when adults cannot see logic”, says David.
Supertramp comes to mind here ‘-)
Trouble is, seemingly in this conversation, ‘logic’ becomes confused with ‘ideology’.
My two cents is that Qantas went about this very badly, unethically, and, even, petulantly.
As for unions, not many smelling like roses themselves, at the mo, however what else do workers have in this worsening climate of corporate greed???
MMMMMMmmmmmmmmmm I can smell the whacky tobackie now…
Just as well I don’t smoke it…..
David,
I do wonder why you insist on commenting, but not contributing to the debate. If you have a point please enlighten us be making it.