Well Done Alan Joyce - BALLSY!

[Tsunamix]

Why is it only QANTAS and The Union getting the brunt of the arguement?
Why isn't someone blaming the Government?
Without the Government's interferance, Inflation wouldn't be running so high (alot higher than the reported 3%), promting the Unions to ask for a 5% per year pay rise for 3 years.
The reason for the need for such a high pay rise, is because EVERYTHING is so bloody expensive. Housing, Utilities, Food to name a few.
The other thing is, with everything being so expensive, not many people can afford to fly as much any more, nor do they wish to do so in style (why discount airlines became popular).
So not only is QANTAS competing with low cost airlines, noone can afford the premium. The only option being to cut costs, or allow the company to fail.
How do they cut costs? Ship maintenance off-shore. It's not QANTAS' fault wages in Australia are rediculous. It's the GOVERNMENTS fault for letting it get out of hand. I'm not even going to say which GOVERNMENT started it, but neither has done anything about it.
NOTHING is sustainable in Australia and it's not QANTAS's fault or the Unions.

Umm VNkid your forgetting about the other airlines operating locally that are profitable. The only unprofitable airlines locally are unionised.That kind of sums up the whole issue right there.

[minux]

Not quite. In order to operate in Australia airlines must be licensed, use government owned airports and comply with government rules and legislation. This will impact to an extent how it is managed within this country.

Government owned airports? What ones are they? Didn't Keating privatise them all?

[Rufys]

Government owned airports? What ones are they? Didn't Keating privatise them all?

LOL!!! Love having people blocked - you miss stupid comments like the one you quoted...

Yes - All major Australian airports are privatised.

The airports buy ATC services and pay landing taxes to Airservices Australia (and in some cases, the RAAF) and the Airports mark up those costs and pass them onto the airlines.

As far as Australian Airlines go, they must comply with Aircraft Operator legislation and licensing legislation etc, which is all internationally standardised and in Australia is administered by CASA.

As far as running an airline, the Government has no role whatsoever.

[Crisis63]

Government owned airports? What ones are they? Didn't Keating privatise them all?

Well it gets down to how you define “owned” I guess. A 50 year lease with extension option, so effectively and endless lease. The lessee in this case operates and runs the commercial part of the facility while the leaser still owns it. The government still operates many of the services and the airports and airlines obviously operate under government rules and guidelines. Just as the airlines are obliged to do.


Oh and nicely played cheap shot too. Picking out one word of the entire post and ignoring the actual content and point. ;-)

[Dr HaxZaw]

Inquisitors' cheap shots over Qantas backfire

Thought this was a pretty good articel. It is his own opinion true but makes some very good points

[minux]

Well it gets down to how you define “owned” I guess. A 50 year lease with extension option, so effectively and endless lease. The lessee in this case operates and runs the commercial part of the facility while the leaser still owns it. The government still operates many of the services and the airports and airlines obviously operate under government rules and guidelines. Just as the airlines are obliged to do.

So the airports aren't owned by govco or are? I am confused...

Oh and nicely played cheap shot too. Picking out one word of the entire post and ignoring the actual content and point. ;-)

Cheap shot? One word? What was the content and point? You are claiming the government own the airports, the government look after legislation and we find out this is not the case (based on another post here, obviously he may be incorrect in which case I am sure you will respond in kind).

use government owned airports

Hrm, 4 is now 1? Rightio.

I left out the other stuff such as government legislation as that, I was unsure of, it seems however Rufys has added a statement on this (which I trust he would know something about having been involved in the Air industry).

I guess if I read vnkid post and yours you are defending the government and towing the union line?

[Reaper]

Not quite. In order to operate in Australia airlines must be licensed, use government owned airports and comply with government rules and legislation. This will impact to an extent how it is managed within this country.

So you are saying that provides Govco with the authority to make operational policy decisions related to the staffing of the airline? BTW - AFAIK most of the major airports were sold off decades ago.

Reaper

[gopher]

LOL!!! Love having people blocked - you miss stupid comments like the one you quoted...

LOL you still get them when they're quoted

guess you showed them haha

[Crisis63]

So the airports aren't owned by govco or are? I am confused...

Cool, lets choke on this red herring a little longer then.
Ownership and Control of Airports

The operators “own” it in the same way you own a leased car I guess.
Tell you what. I was wrong about ownership if that we can go back to discussing the point i.e. conduct of airlines in Australia in relation to laws, regulations and their impact on the country in general.

Cheap shot? One word? What was the content and point? You are claiming the government own the airports, the government look after legislation and we find out this is not the case

There was a little more content to my "claim".

“In order to operate in Australia airlines must be licensed, use government owned airports and comply with government rules and legislation. This will impact to an extent how it is managed within this country.”

The point was that airlines, like any companies cannot operate in Australia as a law unto themselves. When an individual at the head of a company acts the way he did it is reasonable that he may be asked by a government questions about his actions. A company that provides such a significant part of a countries transport infrastructure and can have such a huge impact would be even more likely to be expected to act responsibly and/or explain extreme actions..

(based on another post here, obviously he may be incorrect in which case I am sure you will respond in kind).

He has stuck his head in the ground and is not speaking to me. Well only by proxy. Lol.

I left out the other stuff such as government legislation as that, I was unsure of, it seems however Rufys has added a statement on this (which I trust he would know something about having been involved in the Air industry).

Good luck with that.

I guess if I read vnkid post and yours you are defending the government and towing the union line?

No wonder you struggle with these discussions. You already have your conclusions rigidly drawn and you judgements firmly made. ;-)

[Crisis63]

So you are saying that provides Govco with the authority to make operational policy decisions related to the staffing of the airline? BTW - AFAIK most of the major airports were sold off decades ago.

Reaper

Nup. It gives a government a reason to question an airlines executive who takes extreme measure like grounding an entire fleet of aircraft to make a point. He may well be vindicated but only he has had a chance to give some kind of explanations. Of course it’s complicated by His Holiness, St Tony making claims about who knew what, when and why. It will probably be a waste of time and money anyway as all the pollies are interested in is the political fall out and what it gains and costs them.

[Full Spectrum]

So you have realised you made the statement so now start with the stupid posts irrelevant to anything...great.

I'll leave the overdramatized torch like comments to you.

Never said they weren't privately owned.

Never said they were government owned.

Actually never spoke of ownership.

I did discus of investment qantas and tourism to reaper.

[Reaper]

Nup. It gives a government a reason to question an airlines executive who takes extreme measure like grounding an entire fleet of aircraft to make a point. He may well be vindicated but only he has had a chance to give some kind of explanations. Of course it’s complicated by His Holiness, St Tony making claims about who knew what, when and why. It will probably be a waste of time and money anyway as all the pollies are interested in is the political fall out and what it gains and costs them.

I thought you were talking about control of management decisions??? TBH I have no idea what your on about now.

Reaper

[The_Doctor]

He was too use playing with his boyfriends joystick bahhhhh