Qantas International & Domestic grounded
Oct 29, 2011, 5:45 am
#211
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: DXB / WAW
Programs: Skywards Gold
Posts: 726
I have SIN-SYD flight on Monday (31st OCT) which is a multi-city itinerary (SYD-AKL-MEL-SIN) operated solely by Qantas. I am not sure if it is better to cancel now and look for alternatives? I could rebook SIN-SYD to BA but then I might be stranded in SYD...
Oct 29, 2011, 5:47 am
#212
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Joondalup,WA,Australia
Programs: VS Gold, QPPS, CX, DJ, SG, AA, NH
Posts: 196
As mentioned earlier, this I what I posted to AFF yesterday outlining Joyce's remuneration package, the union claims, and the QF issues. Reposting here due to its value (and its civil tone).
Some of the references are a little Australian, for example the waterfront dispute, but you can find out what these are about with a google search.
Some of the references are a little Australian, for example the waterfront dispute, but you can find out what these are about with a google search.
Having just watched the AGM webcast and seen James Strong (Chairman, Remuneration Committee) lay this issue out in detail - the assertion that Joyce is getting "such an obscene increase" is without merit.
The claims that he is getting a 71% pay rise are false, completely misrepresent the pay structure of the companies CEO, and re-affirms QF's decision to implement a salary package of which the majority is an at-risk component.
For those not familiar with at-risk in the context of salary packages, this means that receipt of a designated amount of the salary is entirely dependant on achieving specific, measurable goals for corporate performance. Think of it as the executive version of commission based pay.
Joyce's salary package for FY2010/11 is set at AUD 6.02m, of which AUD 2.04m is cash salary. Frankly, on the basis of the work he has done to date trying to strengthen the business and diversify to improve revenue, he's earned every cent.
The remaining AUD 3.98m is only payable when Joyce has delivered against the medium and long term targets set as part of his remuneration package, which was voted on and approved at their AGM last year. I wasn't able to discern from the meeting if the allocation of ~1.7m shares (which form part of the Qantas Long Term Incentive Plan - LTIP) is reliant on the meeting of goals and forms part of the AUD 3.98m figure.
Targets set for Joyce to earn that additional AUD 3.98m and the LTIP shares are pretty steep, and include a number of metrics rating QF's performance against the ASX/S&P Top 100, and the basket of globally listed airlines. A bit more info about this can be found in the notice of meeting for today's AGM (See pg. 4, col 2).
Further, any award of shares to Joyce under the LTIP has to be approved by a vote of shareholders at an AGM. I'd happily wager that if institutional investors weren't happy with the CEO's performance, they'd be doing a lot more than voting done a LTIP motion at an AGM.
Further, let's get back to why the airline hasn't reached agreement with the engineers, ground staff and pilots union. It's because these groups are wanting to impose conditions as part of an industrial relations agreement which enshrine old and redundant work practices, and could reasonably prevent the airline from seeking out lawful opportunities to grow the company which would in turn help deliver the job security they so desperately desire.
And I've already covered the legal issues regarding this in another thread, looking at how such conditions could be a plain text breach of the Competition Act subject to the union meeting the criteria for the activities test which would enable this to be classified as restrictive conduct.
Unions in this country have for at least the last 30yrs been heavily resistant to change. We just have to look at the waterfront disputes during the 90's and the significant work done by the previous Federal Government to break apart the stranglehold of the Building and Construction unions.
I'm all for people getting job security, but what I won't, nor do I expect Qantas to stand for, is allowing these groups to hold it to ransom and acting for themselves rather than the greater good. The unions need to grow up, and realise it's high time for their industrial practices to move on.
The claims that he is getting a 71% pay rise are false, completely misrepresent the pay structure of the companies CEO, and re-affirms QF's decision to implement a salary package of which the majority is an at-risk component.
For those not familiar with at-risk in the context of salary packages, this means that receipt of a designated amount of the salary is entirely dependant on achieving specific, measurable goals for corporate performance. Think of it as the executive version of commission based pay.
Joyce's salary package for FY2010/11 is set at AUD 6.02m, of which AUD 2.04m is cash salary. Frankly, on the basis of the work he has done to date trying to strengthen the business and diversify to improve revenue, he's earned every cent.
The remaining AUD 3.98m is only payable when Joyce has delivered against the medium and long term targets set as part of his remuneration package, which was voted on and approved at their AGM last year. I wasn't able to discern from the meeting if the allocation of ~1.7m shares (which form part of the Qantas Long Term Incentive Plan - LTIP) is reliant on the meeting of goals and forms part of the AUD 3.98m figure.
Targets set for Joyce to earn that additional AUD 3.98m and the LTIP shares are pretty steep, and include a number of metrics rating QF's performance against the ASX/S&P Top 100, and the basket of globally listed airlines. A bit more info about this can be found in the notice of meeting for today's AGM (See pg. 4, col 2).
Further, any award of shares to Joyce under the LTIP has to be approved by a vote of shareholders at an AGM. I'd happily wager that if institutional investors weren't happy with the CEO's performance, they'd be doing a lot more than voting done a LTIP motion at an AGM.
Further, let's get back to why the airline hasn't reached agreement with the engineers, ground staff and pilots union. It's because these groups are wanting to impose conditions as part of an industrial relations agreement which enshrine old and redundant work practices, and could reasonably prevent the airline from seeking out lawful opportunities to grow the company which would in turn help deliver the job security they so desperately desire.
And I've already covered the legal issues regarding this in another thread, looking at how such conditions could be a plain text breach of the Competition Act subject to the union meeting the criteria for the activities test which would enable this to be classified as restrictive conduct.
Unions in this country have for at least the last 30yrs been heavily resistant to change. We just have to look at the waterfront disputes during the 90's and the significant work done by the previous Federal Government to break apart the stranglehold of the Building and Construction unions.
I'm all for people getting job security, but what I won't, nor do I expect Qantas to stand for, is allowing these groups to hold it to ransom and acting for themselves rather than the greater good. The unions need to grow up, and realise it's high time for their industrial practices to move on.
Oct 29, 2011, 5:49 am
#213
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Joondalup,WA,Australia
Programs: VS Gold, QPPS, CX, DJ, SG, AA, NH
Posts: 196
Having said that, if this is an essential trip AND you can get hold of someone at another carrier to protect a seat - do it.
Oct 29, 2011, 5:50 am
#214
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 343
This type of stuff always makes me why airlines aren't just non profit organizations. The airline industry is so volatile, and it can be affected in large ways by environmental, economic, and mechanical issues. I would never buy shares in an airline as there is just too much risk. There are so many airlines owned by governments because of these challenging conditions. Is it just greed that compels companies to provide profits to its shareholders? In the last three years im sure QANTAS' share price hasn't done too well and there were no dividends paid.
If airlines were nonprofit there would be scope for governments to reduce its taxes and give other incentives thereby making no government owned airlines competitive with government owned airlines (especially new ones with significantly lower base wage costs).
If airlines were nonprofit there would be scope for governments to reduce its taxes and give other incentives thereby making no government owned airlines competitive with government owned airlines (especially new ones with significantly lower base wage costs).
Oct 29, 2011, 5:58 am
#215
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Joondalup,WA,Australia
Programs: VS Gold, QPPS, CX, DJ, SG, AA, NH
Posts: 196
For those wanting a background on the industrial relations environment which has in part lead to the current issue, the Australian Financial Review has just published an article (non-paywalled thankfully) which gives good insight into it all.
Full article at:
http://www.afr.com/p/national/qantas_dispute_challenge_for_new_hWOs4H2y6UySrSQFC 3IW8J
Full article at:
http://www.afr.com/p/national/qantas_dispute_challenge_for_new_hWOs4H2y6UySrSQFC 3IW8J
Oct 29, 2011, 6:06 am
#216
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: OOL/DOH
Programs: QF LTS WP, Avis Pres Club, HH Diam.
Posts: 3,192
As mentioned earlier, this I what I posted to AFF yesterday outlining Joyce's remuneration package, the union claims, and the QF issues. Reposting here due to its value (and its civil tone).
Some of the references are a little Australian, for example the waterfront dispute, but you can find out what these are about with a google search.
Some of the references are a little Australian, for example the waterfront dispute, but you can find out what these are about with a google search.
Oct 29, 2011, 6:12 am
#218
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Oz
Programs: QF, AA, UA, AS, SW, CO
Posts: 443
And just when airlines didn't need it, the Chilean volcano is expected to erupt again within the next 24 hours.
Oct 29, 2011, 6:12 am
#219
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 13,530
The winners are JQ and DJ. Full flights for the next few days and any remaining seats after that are at full fare.
Oct 29, 2011, 6:14 am
#220
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Joondalup,WA,Australia
Programs: VS Gold, QPPS, CX, DJ, SG, AA, NH
Posts: 196
Air Asia is currently offering rescue fares to QF pax, posted to their FaceBook page recently (and via OzBargain):
Anyone holding a valid QF ticket to or from any of our AAX destinations (D7 flight code) for immediate travel can access our special rescue fare of AUD$150 (all inclusive) per sector outbound from Australia.
Simply arrive at any AAX airport with a hard copy of your valid Qantas ticket and if we have a seat available we will sell it to you for AU$ 150 per sector ex Australia.
For example it will be possible for passengers to reach destinations including London and Paris for $300 one way from Australia.
Please note that this is only for AAX (Flight code D7) destinations. Passengers can take advantage of booking other AirAsia low cost fares online at www.airasia.com to reach their onward destination.
Guests can arrive at the airport three hours before our scheduled departures and visit the service desk with their valid QF ticket to check availability and take advantage of the special fare
Simply arrive at any AAX airport with a hard copy of your valid Qantas ticket and if we have a seat available we will sell it to you for AU$ 150 per sector ex Australia.
For example it will be possible for passengers to reach destinations including London and Paris for $300 one way from Australia.
Please note that this is only for AAX (Flight code D7) destinations. Passengers can take advantage of booking other AirAsia low cost fares online at www.airasia.com to reach their onward destination.
Guests can arrive at the airport three hours before our scheduled departures and visit the service desk with their valid QF ticket to check availability and take advantage of the special fare
Oct 29, 2011, 6:15 am
#221
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: BNE AUS.
Programs: Skywards Gold & Others
Posts: 46
Murphy's Law (no pun intended AJ)
I fly Emirates almost exclusively but have to make a quick dash to MNL on Thursday so decided to take the plunge and opted for a direct flight with Qantas........and the rest is history!
Ah well, the FWA will probably rule in favour of a 21 day grace period and hopefully all will be back to normal shortly............for a while.
Feel sorry for those caught up in the mess, but good on Qantas for bringing it to a head. Qantas needs to make some major changes to their business model to remain competitive in the international market and by giving in to the unions demands in full, will only serve to put them further behind the eight ball.
It's unpatriotic i know (i'm an Aussie), but i fly Emirates because i get a great product for a great price, i don't normally use Qantas because in my opinion, its a reasonable product at an inflated price, lets hope this mess has a silver lining.
Ah well, the FWA will probably rule in favour of a 21 day grace period and hopefully all will be back to normal shortly............for a while.
Feel sorry for those caught up in the mess, but good on Qantas for bringing it to a head. Qantas needs to make some major changes to their business model to remain competitive in the international market and by giving in to the unions demands in full, will only serve to put them further behind the eight ball.
It's unpatriotic i know (i'm an Aussie), but i fly Emirates because i get a great product for a great price, i don't normally use Qantas because in my opinion, its a reasonable product at an inflated price, lets hope this mess has a silver lining.
Oct 29, 2011, 6:21 am
#222
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 343
For those wanting a background on the industria
l relations environment which has in part lead to the current issue, the Australian Financial Review has just published an article (non-paywalled thankfully) which gives good insight into it all.
Full article at:
http://www.afr.com/p/national/qantas_dispute_challenge_for_new_hWOs4H2y6UySrSQFC 3IW8J
l relations environment which has in part lead to the current issue, the Australian Financial Review has just published an article (non-paywalled thankfully) which gives good insight into it all.
Full article at:
http://www.afr.com/p/national/qantas_dispute_challenge_for_new_hWOs4H2y6UySrSQFC 3IW8J
If I owned any stocks in Qantas I would really see this as a deficiency in management and not the unions solely because its managements responsibility to MANAGE industrial relations and that includes creating an environment for employees and the unions that is positive and evokes good will. Anyone blaming the unions think about this scenario. If you saw a child behaving badly in public with parents present would you blame the small child or the parent? Its the parents responsibility to parent the child in a manner that doesn't lead to such behavior.
Oct 29, 2011, 6:30 am
#223
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: BNE AUS.
Programs: Skywards Gold & Others
Posts: 46
Its clear AJ did this drastic move to push the dispute into the Fair Work process. Its kind of like if I had a wound that I wanted a Doctor to see, but wouldn't so I decide to chop my arm off with wound so I could have it attended to. Certainly there is a responsibility of both parties to agree to some compromise. Its not like Fair Work will give a ruling any better than what the parties could have done.
If I owned any stocks in Qantas I would really see this as a deficiency in management and not the unions solely because its managements responsibility to MANAGE industrial relations and that includes creating an environment for employees and the unions that is positive and evokes good will. Anyone blaming the unions think about this scenario. If you saw a child behaving badly in public with parents present would you blame the small child or the parent? Its the parents responsibility to parent the child in a manner that doesn't lead to such behavior.
If I owned any stocks in Qantas I would really see this as a deficiency in management and not the unions solely because its managements responsibility to MANAGE industrial relations and that includes creating an environment for employees and the unions that is positive and evokes good will. Anyone blaming the unions think about this scenario. If you saw a child behaving badly in public with parents present would you blame the small child or the parent? Its the parents responsibility to parent the child in a manner that doesn't lead to such behavior.
Oct 29, 2011, 6:33 am
#224
Join Date: Aug 2007
Programs: QF LTG:
Posts: 1,859
Its clear AJ did this drastic move to push the dispute into the Fair Work process. Its kind of like if I had a wound that I wanted a Doctor to see, but wouldn't so I decide to chop my arm off with wound so I could have it attended to. Certainly there is a responsibility of both parties to agree to some compromise. Its not like Fair Work will give a ruling any better than what the parties could have done...
...
If I owned any stocks in Qantas I would really see this as a deficiency in management and not the unions solely because its managements responsibility to MANAGE industrial relations and that includes creating an environment for employees and the unions that is positive and evokes good will. Anyone blaming the unions think about this scenario. If you saw a child behaving badly in public with parents present would you blame the small child or the parent? Its the parents responsibility to parent the child in a manner that doesn't lead to such behavior.
If I owned any stocks in Qantas I would really see this as a deficiency in management and not the unions solely because its managements responsibility to MANAGE industrial relations and that includes creating an environment for employees and the unions that is positive and evokes good will. Anyone blaming the unions think about this scenario. If you saw a child behaving badly in public with parents present would you blame the small child or the parent? Its the parents responsibility to parent the child in a manner that doesn't lead to such behavior.
) that this is the heart of the matter.Workplace change may well be necessary, indeed it probably is. A competent leadership team would talk to their employees and explain why things need to change. Fear of change is what causes it to fail.
Explain why the changes need to happen, who is going to be severely affected and what will happen to them. Ask for suggestions and get the people on board and they will drive the change. Then it will be successful.
I.e. address their fears.
Here it seems like you (Qantas mgt) just want denigrate your employees and screw them over. Not acceptable.
Make the changes but remember that ultimately it is your employees who will deliver the actual service and be the most important ambassadors for the company.
Oct 29, 2011, 6:37 am
#225
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Oz
Programs: QF LTG, Velocity FF Red, HH Diamond, PC Platinum Ambassador, UA Nothing
Posts: 1,914