Reading the massive Qantas wraparound ads in the papers yesterday, you could be excused for thinking Qantas was set to employ 11 year old junior lifeguards as cabin crew.

Would you like the chicken or the beef tonight Madam?

The spin-heavy ad campaign had the tagline “There’s a new spirit”, and was a backdrop to the announcement that Qantas would restructure itself by cutting 1,000 of its 35,000 staff, while also peparing to set up a new premium service in Asia.

Qantas has long relied on the feelgood factor in its marketing. You know that fantastic feeling when you touch down at an Australian airport after a trip overseas? Qantas has successfully bottled and sold that emotion. It’s our country. Our airline. You bloody beauty. Last night, however, many people voiced concerns that our airline was slipping away. And boy, did Qantas CEO Alan Joyce come out swinging in its defence.

Joyce doesn’t always answer hard questions directly, but today, he delivered the kind of straight talk Australians naturally respect, and a reminder, no less, that our national character owes much to waves of Irish immigration. Yesterday’s gooey spin was gone. Today it was time for was Plan B. Attack!

What really worked Joyce up at this afternoon’s hastily-scheduled press conference was what he called “false accusations” by various industrial groups against Qantas. These “false accusations” presumably included:

- questions over safety standards raised by the Australian and International Pilots Association and others
- claims by the ACTU that Qantas could hardly call itself an Australian airline anymore, and;
- claims by Barry Jackson, of the AIPA, that the 1,000 job cuts would likely blow out to 5,000.

Joyce saved the best of his anger for a journalist who dared ask why Qantas needs to cut from the international division, which lost $200 million last year, when the company made an overall profit of $500 million.

“Five hundred million profit is very small compared to the $2.5 billion we spend each year on new aircraft,” he said.

“We’ve got plenty of time to fix it but this great brand will disappear if we keep on kicking the can down the street.”

The word “brand” is at the heart of today’s debate. For workers and travellers, Qantas has always been more than a brand. It is a national icon, an overused word these days but a word which has always fit in regard to Qantas.

Ask any Qantas worker and they’ll tell you that “Qantas families” were special. They were part of something bigger than themselves. Most of them will also now tell you that Joyce has eroded that culture, with his focus on the bottom line.

Press a little further and you’ll find Qantas workers who claim to have been laid off, then rehired at significantly less than their old wages. A new spirit indeed.

Of course, Joyce has a business to run. His expansionist dreams appear a perfectly valid way of investing in a national brand. He is cutting less than three per cent of his workforce.

But if you could paraphrase the outrage from the unions and others today, it’d be along the lines of “what good is a brand if it’s just logos and paint on the side of a plane, not a culture?”

There are other questions well worth asking today, not least regarding Qantas’ bogan little brother JetStar, and the degree to which yesterday’s cuts pave the way for more investment in that carrier.

The video below, uploaded by a user called “qantaspilots”, asks a fair few interesting questions too.

Most commented

65 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • AdamC says:

      02:38pm | 17/08/11

      Qantas has a lot of challenges, some of which have been magnified by its unannounced, cost-driven decision to become a mid-market, rather than a premium, international carrier.

      That was probably an unforced error, but Qantas’ other disadvantages are not of the management’s making. What would anyone do with a business whose competitors either can exist in near permanent bankruptcy protection (US carriers), don’t really need to make a commercial return (Emirates, Etihad, et al) or don’t have Qantas’ legacy industrial relations headaches (Singapore Airlines)?

      Joyce is at least trying to reshape the Qantas business into being a viable, commercially-driven, private airline in an industry where economic irrationalism is the norm. That is no easy task!

    • dovif says:

      03:55pm | 17/08/11

      Exactly, Australians are happy to pay less to fly other airline. If Singapore airline is cheaper, since they have a cheaper Labour force, Qantas has to do something to complete.

      I am sure if the Author have electricity bill of $100 a month, and he can lower it to $50, he would do it. So I do not see why he thinks Qantas should run at a loss.

      If you ned to blame someone. It was Rudd’s ALP, who allowed Singapore Airline and their cheaper cost, to fly to LA through Australia. Therefore directly eroding Qantas’ profitability. It was probably the main thing that led to Qantas cutting cost

    • Shooter says:

      04:21pm | 17/08/11

      dovif. Yes you are right Rudd opened up the route for Singapore Airlines but in turn we get cheaper flights to the US. The world has gone global and if companies want to compete with others then they need to change. Also remember that Ansett collapsed under the Howard government but it was not the governments fault but the airline and its partners.

    • Thomas Anderson says:

      04:32pm | 17/08/11

      Joyce is just trying to meet his KPIs so he can get himself another yacht. Let’s be honest, since Qantas was all but sold overseas, and the cost cutting began, the service deteriorated, more problems with the equipment were experienced (most likely due to cost cutting in maintenance), and the company’s rep has suffered. But the bottom line is improving, so to hell with the real life issues as long as it all looks good on paper.

    • dovif says:

      04:33pm | 17/08/11

      Shooter

      My point was that it is a bit rich for the ALP/Union to cry foul, when Qantas had to lower their cost structure. When it was the ALP deregulation, that caused the need for it in the first place

    • Shooter says:

      04:55pm | 17/08/11

      dovif point taken. But what about the levies the Howard government raised for Ansett staff that were never fully paid and the surplus that was pumped back into the aviation industry? Qantas.

    • AdamC says:

      04:57pm | 17/08/11

      I don’t for a second think the answer is for the government to featherbed Qantas with protectionist measures. I do feel sorry for Qantas management that they have to operate in an unfairly structured global market, but not sorry enough that I think rolling back competition to protect the airline at travellers’ expense can be justified on any basis.

      I also think Qantas employees’ unions need to get up to speed with Qantas manageement in terms of realising that the company is no longer a sheltered workshop. If Qantas pilots want to have a future, they need to be competitive with pilots from other countries. Why should a Singaporean pilot be paid less than an Australian one, especially given that general living standards in both countries are similar? (Actually, statistically-speaking, they are higher in Singapore.)

    • John the Zombie says:

      05:07pm | 17/08/11

      Thomas you have got to be joking right. The only reason qantas has to do this is to compete pure and simple. All airliners around the world have to change to be moew competativew and the only ppl to blame here are the unions. They have pushed their wages so high to unrealistic positions that QANTAS cant afford to give us the consumer cheaper fares so who do we turn to, the other airline carriers.

      I would like to see the wages paid to tiger, Virgin and Jet star and see if they compare to QANTAS and also now the pilots union want to make Jetstar expensive as well by bringing the pilots up to the same level as pay as them.

      The companies that are doing well are the asia airlines and lets compare numbers. Asia has more routes, more ppl and lower costs then Aus. When I was last in Malaysia airasia was offerign 1 fares to travel to Singapore, phuket, China and all. The place was busy. Lets compare costs as well. If I fly airasis from Perth to Malaysia, return will cost me $450 - $800 depending on time and including a meal and luggage. What will QANTAS charge me. Lets see for travel from Perth to malaysia from 1/09/2011 - 15/09/2011.

      QANTAS - 978

      Garuda - 892

      AirAsia - 818

      Tiger - 521

      So the cheapest are tiger and airasia.

    • Bruce says:

      09:45pm | 17/08/11

      Depending on future ‘government tax’ impacts, I believe we are going to see more companies restructure and move operations off shore. This is only the beginning. Also, interesting that “Shell” at Silverwater in Sydney propose to closed down after many years at that location. I believe many more companies are planning “restructures” which include off shore operations are to come.

    • john says:

      02:50pm | 17/08/11

      People shouldn’t complain, they wanted virgin, tiger over ansett, that cost 22,000 jobs. Qantas has every right to do whatever it takes to remain profitable and to survive.  There are no friends in the airline business, just vultures.

    • Anubis says:

      03:36pm | 17/08/11

      Ansett was killed off by Air New Zealand. It had nothing to do with Virgin, and Tiger were nowhere to be seen on the Australian scene when Ansett went belly up.

      Virgin effectively plugged a gaping chasm in domestic aviation when Ansett went bust.

    • john says:

      04:24pm | 17/08/11

      @Anubis..Wrong, virgin were already operating in Australia. Air New Zealand was not flying domestically here, Why would AirNZ kill off the airline it owned at the time, stupid comment.

    • John the Zombie says:

      05:09pm | 17/08/11

      Anubis was correct. Air New Zealand killed ANSETT and the reason was that the govt/ACCC would not allow ANSETT to be bought by Singapore airlines. Just think of that merger had happened ANSETT would still be running today.

    • john says:

      11:02pm | 17/08/11

      @ John the Zombie, we all knew it was the government that killed Ansett, hence why they introduced the Ansett levy, AirNZ had no interest to kill off its own business LOL, howards attitude towards unionised labor forces is well known at that time.  smile

    • Jason says:

      09:10am | 18/08/11

      @john, it was nothing to do with the government. It was a combination of Air NZ not investing sufficient capital into Ansett (aging fleet, limited international routes etc), and new competition from Virgin Blue and Impulse that contributed to Ansett’s collapse. BTW, someone above mentioned that Rudd had opened the Sydney to LA route to Singapore Airlines, no Australian government has allowed this.

    • Anubis says:

      10:25am | 18/08/11

      Air New Zealand drained Ansett of all operating capability. The entire fuel bill for the Air New Zeraland/Ansett fleet was charged to Ansett accounts. No airline can afford to pay the fuel and maintenace bills for two airlines. Ansett was a competitor of Air New Zealand domestically in NZ. Their purchase of Ansett was to stem the flow of revenue Ansett was taking fromAir NZ domnestically and in the cross-Tasman routes. It was calculated and efficient. The Australain Government was only culpable in the demise of Ansett in that they allowed Air NZ to take it over. The Reason for the Ansett fund was to assist all the Australian employees who found themselves without a job AND without accrued benefits. Air NZ refused to pay holiday pay, Long Service Leave, Super etc and many Ansett employees had nothing.

    • Tex Ranger says:

      02:53pm | 17/08/11

      Ansett was reputed for having a great “family” and see how that turned out.  Unless the company makes money and reinvests it, it won’t be sticking around.

      I thought Alan Joyce was going to invite Leigh Sales on 7:30 last night for her alternative plan, if she didn’t think his was much good!

    • Super D says:

      03:02pm | 17/08/11

      I can’t imagine why anyone would want to fly Qantas anyway.  Having flown with over 20 Airlines in my time I would rate Qantas as amongst the worst.  When I flew Jetstar from Honolulu I thought to myself how much better it was than Qantas.

      Basically any airlines with a unionised cabin crew are rubbish.  No one over 35 should be doing the job.  It’s not supposed to be a “career”. 

      Give me Singapore Airlines or Etihad any day of the week.

    • marley says:

      03:17pm | 17/08/11

      Singapore is a great airline, I agree.  So are Cathay and Emirates.  Haven’t flown Etihad, so I can’t comment on it.  But I’d take Qantas any day of the week over just about any of the European or US carriers.

    • Thomas Anderson says:

      03:19pm | 17/08/11

      Could be the fact that Qantas planes never fell out of the sky?

    • Thomas Anderson says:

      03:25pm | 17/08/11

      Gulf Air is the worst airline I’ve flown with. After my buzzer has been ignored for a while, I decided to ask one of the passing flight crew for a drink. Anyway, I got the drink in the end, but she was far from happy at my request. Can’t complain though, I paid much less than any other alternatives that time.

    • Kassandra says:

      03:30pm | 17/08/11

      QANTAS doesn’t crash.

      Just ask Rain Man.

    • redvixen says:

      03:39pm | 17/08/11

      Why shouldn’t anyone over the age of 35 be doing the job?  Not everyone wants a ‘career’.  Some people are happy to turn up to work, do their job, and get paid.  And there’s nothing wrong with that.  If everybody wanted ‘careers’ we’d have nobody collecting our bins every week.

      I fly Qantas almost exclusively and, except for rare occassions, have had no problems.

    • stephen says:

      04:08pm | 17/08/11

      A ‘career’ huh ?
      Well the next time you’re on a plane and a warning light goes on and there’s to be a forced landing and a pretty young thing gives you a life-jacket and a pat cause you’ve just done a dump you’re so scared and she’s scared too but has a job to do and everybody is looking around to see whose gonna die first and she/he is still taking command of passenger fears and who hasn’t even even put on her own seat-belt..you tell me if you want a hobbyist as cabin-crew, or professionals.
      (Damn near the dumbest comment I ever read on this site.)

    • Dani says:

      04:09pm | 17/08/11

      Kind of unfair rate job suitability on age and decide what is a worthy ‘career’?

    • john says:

      04:33pm | 17/08/11

      @ Super D.“airlines with a unionised cabin crew are rubbish.  No one over 35 should be doing the job.”

      So divided they beg or unionised they stand for fair work &pay;? I like your style Super D make those young monkeys work for peanuts on dirt cheap carriers!

      No-one over 35 should be working as a flighty….sounds like one perverted ageist swine to me, but your right…move over gen X for gen Y & Z - out with the trash, and on to welfare with ex-ansett !.

      We need more opinions like Super D so we can have fresh meat to look at, instead of mutton, ditch anything over 25.

    • dovif says:

      05:02pm | 17/08/11

      Stephen

      When that happens, it probably does not matter

    • John the Zombie says:

      05:19pm | 17/08/11

      John yes fair work and pay which is not what is happening. The amount that the workers are recieving is beyond fair it is over the top and the amount they are again asking for is over the top. For so long the unions have help a gun to QANTAS head but now the enviroment is changing and the unions know this.

    • Super D says:

      08:28pm | 17/08/11

      Interesting to see how people leap to conclusions.  Not once did I mention the sex of cabin crew yet some seem to have interpreted my angle as being that of an old letch.

      It’s actually linked to my comment re unionisation.  Flight attendants are after all hospitality workers albeit with some additional safety training.  The upshot of this is that the skill set is readily mastered.  Flowing on from this one of the impacts of unionisation is promotion based on longevity induced seniority rather than merit.  It is well known that for Qantas you start your “career” in domestic and finish it in International first class.  I have heard many people moan that the further forward in the plane you go the worse the service gets.

      If anyone can mount an argument as to how a 50 year old would perform better in an emergency situation than a 30 year old I will concede the point.  Personally I doubt that there would be any difference. 

      Apologies if anyone thought I was demanding Lynx air….

    • Timmy says:

      10:52am | 18/08/11

      I agree.

      1. Qantas is always more expensive,
      2. more prone to delays due to engineers/pilots/flight attendants/ground crew/whoever else want to strike.
      3. Their service is poor compared to Cathay, Singapore Airlines, Emirates, etc.
      I want to support Australian based airlines, but it has to be able to compete with the others as well.

    • Michael says:

      11:02am | 18/08/11

      Quantas has crashed before,  prop planes decades ago, they don’t like talking about it though, however no jet airliner of Quantas’ has gone down.

      99 fatalities up to 1951.

    • L. says:

      03:21pm | 17/08/11

      “It’s not supposed to be a “career”.”

      I honestly can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not, but if not.. where the hell is it written that being an international hostie shouldn’t be a “career”..?

    • David S says:

      03:28pm | 17/08/11

      As Anthony says, Qantas has been successful in capturing a sense of Australianness which, if the price is the same as the competition, probably tips customers over to buying a Qantas ticket with the sounds of Peter Allen ringing in one’s ears.

      But global airlines operate on tiny margins and for-profit carriers like Qantas have to compete with foreign carriers whose cost structures are significantly lower due to cheaper labor and more efficient fleet mix.  And despite what people will say about service and loyalty programs, leisure travelers will invariably purchase based on price.

      Perhaps it was always inevitable that the stockholders’ quite reasonable demands to ensure longer term profitability would catch up to the corporate strategy.  And seeing the inevitable split of the airline into 3, a low cost carrier, an Australian based full service, and an Asian based full service, the Australian based pilots are bringing out their best weapon which strikes at the public’s sentimental heart; the sense of Australianness that we all share with Qantas.  To be sure, this is about job security for legacy Australian based workers but who would prefer the Ansett option for Qantas rather than a vibrant Australasian carrier?  The march to higher volume and higher yield routes in Asia should be encouraged.

    • Aitch B says:

      03:33pm | 17/08/11

      I recently completed a round the world trip with Lufthansa - two of the legs were with Qantas.

      Can’t complain about either airline. Even the short legs between Munich and London with Lufthansa were fine.

      I must be easily pleased. I’ve flown Cathay, Air Canada, Singapore, Japan, United, Qantas, Lufthansa, British and Malaysian and the only one I wasn’t happy with was British - no bloody legroom!!

    • thatmosis says:

      03:38pm | 17/08/11

      I made the mistake of flying QANTAS a few years ago and apart from the rotten food, lousy service, dirty restrooms and filthy plane the flight was okay. Have flown Etihad from then on and the difference has to be seen to be believed, great sevice by good staff who love their job, great food, comfortable seating and clean planes, what a relief.

    • Justin says:

      03:42pm | 17/08/11

      Alan Joyce could learn a lot from the Geoff Dixon approach. The genius of Geoff was that he’d start making statements about how bad things were, then he’d go to the unions & say, “help us out here.” They’d work out a deal for x number of job cuts, announce it with union support, then a week or two later there’d be Geoff announcing a $500 million profit, but stressing these were hard times.

      Alan got the timing all wrong.

    • Andrew says:

      03:47pm | 17/08/11

      Its all quite simple, without cutting jobs they won’t make a profit. This was the case in the 2010FY and i dare say the 2011FY as well and will probably also be for the 2012FY and onwards.

      The economics of airlines are terrible. Joyce is right, $500M profit is small for Qantas. He is just doing the best he can in a bad business, thats his job.

    • Shama says:

      03:53pm | 17/08/11

      So much of this is personal experience.  Had some terrible experiences on Singapore Airlines and never fly them and hands down the rudest staff were on British Airways.

      I almost always fly Qantas and have had no negative experiences.  I find their laid back attitude a bit of a relief. 

      There is a sense of Australianness about the airline though and I have little idea if that is going to change with the recent announcements.

    • Kika says:

      04:10pm | 17/08/11

      Just out of interest, what were your negative experiences with Singapore Airlines? I have found them to be really good, really helpful except the only problem i found is that their ticketing system is a nightmare. Especially if you have to fly out from another country, like Sri Lanka. You deal with the local office and not a headquarters.

    • Shama says:

      11:28am | 18/08/11

      Singapore Airlines have misplaced my baggage every single time I have flown the airlines. And for some reason their famed customer service never seems to extend to me. Maybe its the local office factor but whatever.

      Its also their literalness and po-facedness. For e.g. I understand maximum baggage rules. Its usually not a problem for me but on the odd occasion it is I find it is applied very literally by SA.  The Qantas folk apply the rules but take a more pragmatic approach.

      Its not a cultural thing though - Changi is way better than Sydney Airport.

      A bit in jest but I also prefer the inflight entertainment on Qantas grin

    • Utopia Boy says:

      03:53pm | 17/08/11

      Qantas exists on a belief they have a right to exist, and that Australians will gladly pay their overpriced fares and settle for crap service in crappy old planes.
      As far as customer service goes, it is the worst of any international airline I have flown. I shifted all my company’s flights to Emirates because:
      - They are rarely more than 5-10 minutes late.
      - There are enough cabin crew to meet the demand on each flight (except A380).
      - Frequent Flyer program makes Qantas look like food stamps.
      - The airport lounges are top quality.

      Qantas fails in all the above.
      Qantas is a dead duck, currently spiraling out of the skies with only one wing.

      Outsourcing of maintenance WILL lead to a fatal air crash. It is only a matter of time. Once that happens, Qantas will have no reputation at all.
      Sell your shares. Now.

    • marley says:

      04:07pm | 17/08/11

      If Qantas is going to stand a chance of competing internationally, it has to do something to address some of the problems you’ve identified - which to me, means they have to find some efficiencies that they cannot get here in Australia.  I don’t see that they ‘ve got much choice.

      Anyway, who does maintenance for Emirates?  And didn’t they nearly crack a plane up at Melbourne not so long ago due to a computer glitch?  Didn’t seem to hurt their business.

    • Kika says:

      04:09pm | 17/08/11

      Hang on, Singapore Airlines is one of the safest airlines in the world and they don’t operate out of Australia. The only fatal crash they had was during take off and during a typhoon they crashed into something on the runway at Taipei - and should have been cautioned by Taipei air traffic control.

      Why do you assume just because a plane doesn’t come from Australia that it’s doomed?

    • John the Zombie says:

      05:46pm | 17/08/11

      Kika Singapore airlines requires their future pilots to have a 4 yr degree before attending the cadet training programe.

    • Dash says:

      03:58pm | 17/08/11

      Qantas has a cost base which is some 20points higher than it’s competitors. And the biggest cost to any company is the cost of it’s staff. In Australia, labour and labour law compliance is expensive and in some part due to the operation of unionism. If Qantas was to stand still, they would go backwards. They need to change and become more competitive. If the cost of Australian labour is uncompetitve on the global market, unfortunately that means job losses. Sounds like Qantas is out sourcing to Asia. That’s business.

      Nice sentiment Sharwood re “Qantas families”, but that does nothing for shareholder returns or the viability of the company. There are no “Qantas families” when the business is shut down or sold! And you can’t have a culture in a business that doesn’t exist!

    • Timmy says:

      10:55am | 18/08/11

      well said. I agree. Unions are killing the brand.

    • TL says:

      04:19pm | 17/08/11

      Seriously, the general public needs to wake up to itself. They are happy to have cheap flights with new carriers like Tiger & Virgin, but then get all patriotic when Qantas tries to change its business model to respond to competitive pressures. If everyone cares so much about Qantas, why do they choose other carriers? If you want to be patriotic, have the decency to be consistent.

    • Kika says:

      04:20pm | 17/08/11

      I like Qantas. I have flown with them a few times. The thing I love about an airline is no fuss, easy to deal with, sit down get comfy and let’s go. No hassle. That’s why I like them and SAS Scandinavian. They are similar. I like that.  I trust them and national pride gets in the way a bit when you see them overseas.. it’s like a little bit of home abroad. 

      Emirates… don’t get me started. The worst airline and I will never fly with them again.

      I honestly think Qantas has been maliciously targeted by the unions for so long now that for them to keep up with the internationals is going to be really hard. We all love Qantas for their maintenance. Hello? The A380 issue was a result of Rolls Royce’s negligence, not Qantas, and the pilot managing to get a crippled plane safely back to Singapore with not one person injured - even though there was an oil fire in the engine! 

      I am flying with Qantas in a few weeks and am happy to do so. Though the whole rebooking process of my cancelled flight last year was a bit to be desired. The girl on the phone was rude, abrupt and actually questioned whether I wanted to rebook given I would have to pay a few hundred extra to do so. I was like… ummm… yes I gave you $600.00 last year for some tickets.. you want that for nothing, do you?

    • Utopia Boy says:

      05:11pm | 17/08/11

      What happened with Emirates? I rarely have any problem at all.
      Just a query.

    • Demoman says:

      04:50pm | 17/08/11

      Airlines have low profit margins, are capital intensive and very sensitive to fuel prices and economic conditions. It is hardly surprising that Qantas has to do what it needs to do to remain competitive. Unions act like people own their job and they would rather see Qantas fail (thus everyone loses their job) than to face the fact that jobs have got to go. It is far too expensive to base in Australia given the labour cost and red tape as well as annoying unions.

      The question is, do we continue to allow capital and business to flee the West in favour of cheap Asia or do we finally implement some economic protectionism?

    • Gordon says:

      05:18pm | 17/08/11

      Aeroflot had a protected market. Ever flown with them?

    • John the Zombie says:

      05:41pm | 17/08/11

      Interesting you talk about protectism because that is the reason China is holding its currency down. If China was to actual have it currency valued correctly it woould be on par or higher then the US dollar. Also to note in India most car companies are actually required to build their cars in India or they are not allowed to sell them there.This is for the main froup such as ford, GM, Mitsubishi and Toyoyta.

    • Gordon says:

      05:15pm | 17/08/11

      When your mates at work brag about their holidays OS do they say ..”& we flew Qantas because it’s an Aussie Icon & we’re deeply patriotic” or do they say “..and we got these great $38 fares from Brand X!”

      This is why Qantas has to do what it does.

    • Jim says:

      05:19pm | 17/08/11

      The various unions that are represented amongst QANTAS employees have held their employers over a barrel for years with crazy demands…how can they be shocked and dismayed that they company wants to move some of it offshore?? Do union members not follow history? It’s been happening since WWII people.

    • Tony says:

      08:42pm | 17/08/11

      Whats the big surprise, people vote Labor, Labor bugger the economy, people lose jobs.
      Happens every time.
      Hows everyone enjoying the “change”?

    • Daniel says:

      09:34pm | 17/08/11

      I am lauding the day that QANTAS totally removes itself from Australia as an Australian company. The job cuts are disgusting but if you are a free market extremist like the Liberal party and their supporters then they should be rejoicing this decision by QANTAS. This is the capitalist system in action. This is “leaving it to the market”.....

    • Demoman says:

      11:44pm | 17/08/11

      Talking utter nonsense. This market is not free and neither is the USA market as both our and their governments regulate everything. Your own political ideology is likely so far left (evident from your woe is capitalism ravings) that everything appears to be extreme relative to you.

      Like a typical leftie you want to make sure everyone suffers and would rather see Qantas fail completely, thus everyone loses their job, than to see a few people lose their job while others still keep them.

    • John the Zombie says:

      12:12am | 18/08/11

      So daniel if QANTAS doesnt change and ends up going the way of ANSETT you wont mind. Also I guess you fly QANTAS everytime you go overseas or interstate or do you like 99.9% ppl look 4 the cheapest option. I have flown on airasia a few times and guess what their service is 100 times better then QANTAS and they are a budget airlines.

      I guess u are also against ppl who online shop as they are makin business’s in Aus close down.

      Also note this free economy of a capitalist system is the reason why we have huge trade with China and we are not in the back waters of a recession.

      Geez I wish laborites could just think before they type dribble.

    • Kipling says:

      07:57am | 18/08/11

      @ Demoman
      “both our and their governments regulate everything.”

      Now there is a statement from the absolute depths of ignorance to reality…
      Regulate everything do they? So explain dereulation of media ownership, banking, petrol industry etc etc etc….
      The list goes on.
      Tell me clearly and succinctly now, how is that representative of our Government “regulating” everything.
      That is one of the dumbest and most grossly disreprresentative of reality statments that I have seen published anywhere.
      I am sure that you honestly believe what you said, because it would be even dumber to present a statement like that as a deliberate lie.
      Best laugh I have had for a while though.

    • steve says:

      07:52am | 18/08/11

      its a business, not a charity.

      Let it change or watch it go bankrupt.

    • Kiplng says:

      08:04am | 18/08/11

      It is absolutely ludicrous rubbish that for many it seems the unions are totally to blame for QANTAS selling out Australian jobs overseas without any mention (and consequently credit where it is due) to the impeccable safety record QANTAS had. One would think that the several recent incidents (you remember engine explosions, bits falling off etc) have not raised the odd eyebrow in concern. QANTAS had a reputation for safety and security, why? Due to efficient, safe and diligent work practices. It is obviously a foreign concept to many that one might be expected to pay for such work practices; clearly it is not something that QANTAS wished to pay for any further.
      Sure, unions have made employers uncomfortable, after all unions have been the “keep the bastards honest” big stick that have fought for wages and conditions that are being systematically undermined by the “global” market. Global market is a euphemism for competitive slave labour….

    • OchreBunyip says:

      08:59am | 18/08/11

      A company that promotes it is a family is doing so to gain emotional leverage over its employees. I’m surprised people still fall for this obvious manipulation. QANTAS owes Australia nothing just as Australians do not owe QANTAS their custom.

      If other airlines operating in Australia can do the same job QANTAS does but for less, consumers should question what is wrong with the flying Kangaroo’s business model.

    • Zopo says:

      11:59am | 18/08/11

      I do agree with the notion through of what is the point of a brand if it is just a logo. A companies culture is also much a part of the brand as the logo.

      I always look to QANTAS when flying overseas but always pick another airline as they are always way to expensive, so I guess if QANTAS doesn’t do something soon there will be no QANTAS. If you had said that about Ansett all those years ago you wouldn’t have believed it but it happened.

    • Jerra says:

      06:03pm | 18/08/11

      Qantas has had a jet airliner accident… in Bangkok.  They even spent something like $150m to fix it so it was only an ‘incident’ not a ‘accident’.  That’s looking after the brand in it’s most crass terms.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter