Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Qantas | Frequent Flyer
Reload this Page >

Qantas International & Domestic grounded

Qantas International & Domestic grounded

Old Oct 30, 2011, 4:05 pm
  #526  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Programs: QFF WP
Posts: 379
Originally Posted by Lonely Flyer
This should have been a top priority for her and not to respond is her failure.
Why would a months-long industrial dispute between two private parties, neither of whom had previously indicated a desire for Government intervention, have taken priority over a meeting of Government leaders ?

Why would _Government_ business not take priority over conflicts between _Non-Government_ parties ? Conflicts which had, at least until Saturday, apparently been proceeding in a restrained and measured manner.

I bet if her decorator for the lodge called she would have taken the call.
Well, at least you're wearing your partisianship on your sleeve.

Why do I get the feeling that if the Government had jumped in months ago and told QANTAS to compromise on the Unions' demands you would have been jumping up and down in rage about them messing about with private industry ?

Last edited by drsmithy; Oct 30, 2011 at 4:18 pm
drsmithy is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 4:25 pm
  #527  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 320
Go Team Joyce!!!
db1234db1234 is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 4:29 pm
  #528  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Programs: Flying: VA; Buying: AA, AS, AV, BA, UA!
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by drsmithy
Why do I get the feeling that if the Government had jumped in months ago and told QANTAS to compromise on the Unions' demands you would have been jumping up and down in rage about them messing about with private industry ?
Yup, I've been having that feeling all along reading a lot of these posts...if you have a political axe to grind the government can't win whichever option it chooses.
wheresmybagba is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 4:37 pm
  #529  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: BNE, Australia...not too far from the nearest Qantas Pub err Club
Posts: 3,636
Originally Posted by thewinchester
I've been updating threads with the latest factual information across three forums, and going hell for leather updating a boatload of friends on social networks inc. some pretty lively debate.

...

Frankly after all of this - I'm shattered.
Good work and thank you...
willyroo is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 4:45 pm
  #530  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney
Programs: Qantas Platinum, Hilton Honors Gold
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by wheresmybagba
Yup, I've been having that feeling all along reading a lot of these posts...if you have a political axe to grind the government can't win whichever option it chooses.
Spot on, damned if they do, damned if they don't.
On the subject of getting back in the air, now up to CASA to go through the paperwork, and QF are hoping by 2pm (EDST) flights will start again.
Blackadder1402 is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 5:04 pm
  #531  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 949
Lets hope there is no huge egos from both sides, and that this leads to a long-term fix for Qantas, and in particular Qantas international.

AJ is speaking now (looks like same suit and tie as yesterday on a side note, so definitely been working non-stop).

.....on a side note....I am unsure if this is a Win for Gillard, or another Gillard failure?!?
Platinum A332 is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 5:05 pm
  #532  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, Kailua-Kona, Cairns
Programs: UA 1K >2MM, IC Plat, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Gold
Posts: 740
Originally Posted by sguy
The British judiciary for example calls themselves a branch of government and so does the Australian high court. They are still of course independent from the executive/legislature...
This is incorrect.

The "executive" (which is also the parliamentary party in power), appoints and can dismiss judges, at least in Australia.

Nothing independent about that.

And given that there is no "separation of powers" in a parliamentary system, highly toxic to crime fighting.
jimmc66 is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 5:08 pm
  #533  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia; NYC, LHR, GVA
Programs: UA 1K 2MM; QF 1P; DJ WP; CX DIA, EK GL, HH DIAMOND; PC Spire RA; SPG PLAT; HERTZ PC; Avis CC
Posts: 255
Originally Posted by Dave Noble
There's a big difference between accepting a job on a set of conditions to having those conditions changed once employed
Missing point here is industry conditions change once you are employed. If you can't change employment conditions when the industry conditions are changed you are on a one way trip to bankruptcy.

Some unions are receptive (understandably not entirely positive) to this type of change and some management teams are more skilled are taking their workforce with them. Sadly APIA, ALEA, TWU and the QF executive team do not fall in to this category.
chandi is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 5:16 pm
  #534  
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: australia
Posts: 5,755
Originally Posted by thewinchester
A judicious use of smilies with that post may have been appropriate - because if I didn't take that post in the good nature intended I might have told you to take a long walk off a short pier
The only short pier close to where I am would have me swimming off Copacabana - I'm more than happy to take that long walk.

Overuse of smilies turns a subtle joke into an unsubtle one

And echoing Willyroo thanks for the sterling job over the week-end
3544quebec is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 5:34 pm
  #535  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia; NYC, LHR, GVA
Programs: UA 1K 2MM; QF 1P; DJ WP; CX DIA, EK GL, HH DIAMOND; PC Spire RA; SPG PLAT; HERTZ PC; Avis CC
Posts: 255
Originally Posted by Platinum A332
The former chief economist of Qantas was on News 24. Made a couple of interesting points;

- The international arm of Qantas should be renationalised, to put it on par with all peers making Qantas uncompetitive (specifically naming EK, SQ, TG and MH amongst others).
- Australia's air treaties should be looked at.
Even though this sounds like a good solution this will mean one of two results.

1.) Artificially (using a tax, duty etc) raise the cost for foreign airlines are equivalent to QF. This would result in higher airfares. This is actually the case in the Australian book selling industry. And you can see the results of that where the same book in Australia is in most cases 30%-40% that of Amazon.

2.) Subsidise QF with (a tax break, employment grant, direct equity etc) so that it will have more funds to cover the higher costs. In which case we have to decide where the government cuts back to fund this. Defence, Health, roads, schools?

If we continue down this like what jobs will we protect next? Allied Audio Tape Makers Union? Floppy Disk Makers of Australia? Office Memo Delivery Persons Union? White Pages?
chandi is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 5:48 pm
  #536  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia; NYC, LHR, GVA
Programs: UA 1K 2MM; QF 1P; DJ WP; CX DIA, EK GL, HH DIAMOND; PC Spire RA; SPG PLAT; HERTZ PC; Avis CC
Posts: 255
Originally Posted by Platinum A332
The reality is all of Qantas' main competitors internationally enjoy some sort of government protection (even CX does, based in free-market Hong Kong).
This is an often made but rarely backed up claim at-least as far as SQ is concerned. Here is the SQ annual report for 2011. Can you point out where in the P&L or Balance sheet it shows equity/cahs injections from the state?


Often quoted subsidies are:
1.) They pay lower landing/loading fees at their national hubs. So does "QF" in Melbourne, Sydney etc. As in QF charges more to service another airline than they do to service them selves.

2.) SQ can raise more money cheaply off the Singapore state balance sheet. SQ is owned by Temasek Holdings which is the Singapore Sovereign Wealth fund. The closest equivalent in Australia is the Future Fund. A another equivalent may be approx $3Trillion Australians have invested in supper. In either case their balance sheets are a lot stronger than QF. But in either case QF is not seen as a good investment compared to BHP, banks, etc.
chandi is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 5:53 pm
  #537  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Programs: Flying: VA; Buying: AA, AS, AV, BA, UA!
Posts: 2,349
Originally Posted by chandi
1.) Artificially (using a tax, duty etc) raise the cost for foreign airlines are equivalent to QF. This would result in higher airfares. This is actually the case in the Australian book selling industry. And you can see the results of that where the same book in Australia is in most cases 30%-40% that of Amazon.
It's not the case in the Australian book industry...there is no additional duty on foreign books. The bookseller is in fact forced to sell the Australian published book if it is available within x days of publishing elsewhere. Otherwise they're free to sell the cheaper imported books.
wheresmybagba is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 5:59 pm
  #538  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia; NYC, LHR, GVA
Programs: UA 1K 2MM; QF 1P; DJ WP; CX DIA, EK GL, HH DIAMOND; PC Spire RA; SPG PLAT; HERTZ PC; Avis CC
Posts: 255
Originally Posted by LHR/MEL/Europe FF

as for the nationalization argument... there was a good point made by another doctor via the age... he was going to read cancer scans and qf is the only airline capable of carrying isotopes... he now can't do that. this is a reason why if nationalization occurs, it should be for the whole business, including vital domestic services linking remote areas.
This used to be Ansett. And we have had cancer screenings in Australia since 2001.
chandi is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 6:11 pm
  #539  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: RSE
Programs: AA Exp|VA Platinum
Posts: 15,481
Originally Posted by jimmc66
This is incorrect.

The "executive" (which is also the parliamentary party in power), appoints and can dismiss judges, at least in Australia.
That's incorrect. Judges can only be removed if both houses censure them and it can only be because of misbehaviour or incapacity.
bensyd is offline  
Old Oct 30, 2011, 6:12 pm
  #540  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Programs: QF, Skywards, SQ, Centurion
Posts: 391
Originally Posted by thewinchester
Frankly after all of this - I'm shattered.
After reading all of your posts on here throughout this issue, I wanted to thank you for all your hard work in delivering factually sound and helpful posts to those reading this thread. Top work! I'm surprised your not part of the industry given your intimate knowledge and expertise on the matter.

Thanks heaps thewinchester
haydensydney is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.