Australia's iconic airline on life support

[stui magpie]

^


I've seen "Safety" mentioned a few times.

Who says that they have compromised safety standards? Repeating the urban myth doesn't make it fact.

The maintenance unions have a vested interest in saying that, so I immediately discount their opinion. In fact, some of their argument that they don't do as good a job in Asia could be construed as racism. What else is there to support lower safety standards?

Aren't there standards that are to apply when maintaining aircraft and aren't Qantas meeting them? Tiger airways didn't and they were taken off the air until they did. Other international airlines get their maintenance done outside Australia, are they all unsafe because of it?

Emirates?
Thai International?
Singapore Air?

2 of these 3 are based in Asia and the 3 have most of the routes between Australia and London. Who monitors their safety?

[pietillidie]

Pied Piper, where we seem to part ways on this is that I don't expect anything from Qantas outside the rules of the game they're playing. They're not a national airline anymore, so the quality of their service is a market consideration, not a national scandal.

The problem, of course, is that they're still trading on the reputation of having once been a national airline, while simultaneously trashing that reputation. If so, we have to cut the bastards loose and stop letting them trade off the past, include any advantages they get from favourable or preferential treatment.

The unholy combination of private profit making and public risk taking is a menace. You either privatise something properly, or you run it as a public good. My question is this: what advantages, if any, do Qantas get that other airlines operating in the free market don't get? (Did someone above mention protected routes?).

[HAL]

They might have.

[MOTR]

I'm going to mention the increase in the reporting of mechanical failures. I know this can be quite a subjective way to measure things, but the Qantas brand has certainly been tarnished. Qantas would would have benchmarks and safety measures. If safety had improved, or at least not declined, we'd certainly know about it.

[MOTR]

There are certainly protected routes, Pietillidie.

[Pied Piper]

Not sure where you're coming from with that last post Stui; you'd have to have lived in a bubble not to be aware of the number of near-calamities that have beset Qantas in recent years.

pietillidie, not sure where our point of disagreement is - I think I mentioned the decline in service, among other things, by way of contrast to the 71 percent increase in remuneration of the CEO.

[3.14159]

Not only did their CEO take a 70% pay increase,^^^ they also posted record profits.
How does that fit with their "We can't afford to pay more, guarantee employment, etc etc".

Spare us the sanctimony QANTAS!
It was you that grounded the fleet, not your workers!

[pietillidie]

Okay, I see, PP. I must have conflated your post with other posts I'd read.

Mind you, the remuneration issue is kind of the same thing, isn't it? The shareholders are paying what they see fit to pay.

But I guess as with the financial crisis we have to ask what is both enabling and driving the shareholders to pay this. In the case of obscene financial industry salaries and bonuses, taxpayer insurance underwrote irrational non-market payments through the "too big to fail" externality.

What externalities are underwriting the irrational salary being paid to Joyce? This is what I'd like to know, and why I keep asking what anti-market advantages Qantas is getting.

[stui magpie]

Goddamn Pietillidie, we may be on the same team here for a change.

[stui magpie]

[MJ23]

so, they are bleeding money, have to cut cost's to survive including moving maintenance off shore which supposedly causes more near-calamities than they have had ever before.
The unions can see the writing on the wall and are after job security- in the private sector -while also asking for considerable increases in pay and other benefits.
Qanatas cant compete now. Hows it going to by meeting the union demands and moving maintenance back to australia ?
I would suggest the 71% wage increase is for doing exactly what he is doing now.
The easiest thing he could do is nothing, pay what the unions want, keep his job a few years and retire to a good life while the airline meets ansett.
The complaints on the decline of Qantas service levels and standards are exactly why they must make this stand.
Even still, they are far better than Virgin and Jet star.

[HAL]

Fine as far as I know.

[3.14159]

He isn't being paid this obscene amount of money to produce cost decreases THIS finacial year, not next year, 5 or even 10 years down the track. The pilots and ground crew WANT the Airline to prosper in the future, it's their career they are fighting for after-all.
Can Joyce say the same?

As i said before, QANTAS pulled the pin. The unions have been negotiating since last June with the airline refusing to give an inch on any claim EXCEPT that that $5 million pay-rise to Joyce!

It has nothing to with safety.

[pietillidie]

[MJ23]