Qantas finally fighting against the Unions, gets battered for being a CEO

Absolutely hate his #OccupyWorld bullshit. The Unions here have been crippling corporate businesses for yonks. When a CEO fights back and he gets battered by the media.

So anyway, back to the topic:

From 8pm AEDT on 31/10 Qantas will lock out all employees covered by the new ALAEA, TWU and AIPA agreement. http://bit.ly/23SFRn

https://twitter.com/#!/QantasMedia/s...65310304165888

Best watch Joyce's announcement before seeing CEO and sackings in the same title and judging it. Hopefully we see a positive outcome from this. Very sad it's had to come to this but there was no other choice. The company wouldn't be able to support itself with all these industrial strikes.

QANTAS are willing to refund customers their money back and also give support to them.

Some interesting announcements in the coming few hours:

https://twitter.com/#!/QantasMedia
https://twitter.com/#!/QantasAirways


Engineers union not surprised by grounding
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news...029-1mpe6.html

An unbiased attempt to summaries this event
http://www.keepqantasflying.com.au/

before you pull the #OccupyWorld card:

Those employees would not be paid during the lock-out. A Qantas spokesman said the airline's executive and its board also would not be paid.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/qa...#ixzz1cBLYrj8G

The OccupyWorld movement and the Qantas strike are two totally different things and are unrelated, the Qantas industrial action has been rolling for over two years now with work to rule, no overtime and limited strikes.

OccupyWorld started off as Occupy Wall Street, a demonstration against corporate greed in America. Statistics bear this out, the AVERAGE pay for a CEO in the U.S. is 169 times that of the average worker. Other stats include the fact that during the financial bail out by the U.S. Government of the major financial institutions operating officers bonuses were capped at 5million dollars per officer if financial aid was to be paid.

You must also remember the root of the financial crisis was leveraged debt, a major contributing factor being the sub-prime mortgages which had been sold for the last 10 years in the U.S. by various financial institutions which were then resold to other financial institutions world wide, while the whole sub-prime market collapsed through massive amounts of defaults on the loans.

These loans were specifically targeted at those who could not afford a mortgage and were therefore vulnerable, they offered a sub-prime (or less than the current rate for mortgages) for between 2 to 5 years and the lending criteria was extremely low on these. Once the full rate kicked in at maturity many of these same people were simply unable to pay, it was a financial house of cards which was always going to collapse, yet because of a complete lack of regulation in the U.S. and the fact that this debt was off-loaded to many financial institutions worldwide, the whole world got to share in the fallout from this greed. It is like an institutional ponzi scheme, only this one was perfectly legal if guaranteed to fail like all ponzi schemes eventually do.

I do believe unfettered capitalism without regulation like that practised in the U.S. has at it's heart a simple flaw, human greed, you only have to look at the Enron or WorldCom debacles to see what can happen, and despite all that has happened in the last 3 years there is still no regulation or controls being envisaged for the self same companies that (with the exception of those that collapsed) caused the financial crisis and it's ongoing effects.

The world economy is still sluggish, and is actually teetering on the brink of another depression, yet while the European banking system is being overhauled and regulated, there is no further regulation of U.S. financial institutions ? There are countries that are now almost bankrupt because of this debt crisis, in fact Greece and Ireland if they had not received bail outs would be completely financially ruined.

I fail to see how OccupyWorld as a movement and the Qantas industrial action have anything in common ?

Very good summary of the US banking system scheme, Art!

@NZB: I understand the concepts that make a self-reliant, hard-working individual anti-union, but unions are typically one of very few mechanisms in place where a worker can make a reasonable wage, have basic job security, cover benefits, and (possibly) set aside money for retirement.

While the belief that one can work hard, and make it through these efforts is quite admirable, it is largely a myth. It is easy to support these corporations with the thought of "one day, I'll be in that position, and I wouldn't want to be taxed highly, or bound by unions", however, the truth remains that you have a higher chance of winning the lottery than you do of rising from a middle-class or lower family and becoming a CEO of a corporation. These corporations also do everything in their power to abuse their position, and crush anyone who stands in their way. They think nothing of you, or your livelihood. Support for corporate interests is counter to your well-being.

Rooting for the destruction of unions is like rooting for one party systems. In that manner, it's asking for the balance of power to be left overwhelmingly unchecked, allowing one group with a common interest to exploit the rest with little recourse. Unions aren't supposed to be gracious angels farting pixie dust upon the microscale economies, but a bottom up countermeasure to prevent top down curb stomps. It's not that they're necessary, but having them around minimizes ass rape, they're like the rope on our soap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iroled

capitalism huge thing ( huge eating governments )... )gunmens( .. sir andrew tanenbum said that in 1742 .. it was winter i guess ...

---

Once, just once, I wish you could at least pretend to be able to read and write.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by megabyteme

@NZB: I understand the concepts that make a self-reliant, hard-working individual anti-union, but unions are typically one of very few mechanisms in place where a worker can make a reasonable wage, have basic job security, cover benefits, and (possibly) set aside money for retirement.

---

We have FairWork Australia here so there really isn't any need for Unions to enforce their views. Go to FWA, make a complaint, an officer comes and inspects and you get a payout.

Quote:

---

While the belief that one can work hard, and make it through these efforts is quite admirable, it is largely a myth. It is easy to support these corporations with the thought of "one day, I'll be in that position, and I wouldn't want to be taxed highly, or bound by unions", however, the truth remains that you have a higher chance of winning the lottery than you do of rising from a middle-class or lower family and becoming a CEO of a corporation. These corporations also do everything in their power to abuse their position, and crush anyone who stands in their way. They think nothing of you, or your livelihood. Support for corporate interests is counter to your well-being.

---

I've worked in managerial positions in medium business before. I tried by best to do what was best for staff but it's near impossible without bringing the company in the red. I was there to run a business not run a local milkbar with kids.

I've had my fair share with Unions, while I was working on the meat/poultry farm with my parents they were a necessity for fighting back against Steggles. So I understand you're coming from. Steggles didn't give a fuck about your livelihood, they were all about profits. While you owned a chicken farm with Steggles you were always in debt but had a good return. Some farms a little larger than ours were earning around $300,000 a batch :O.

Alan Joyce to supposed sly Irishman he is gave his staff rights, gave them job security, even gave them pay rises!

In theory Unions are admirable for fighting for "workers rights" but it seems here they're just after the CEO's paycheck. There really isn't a need for them anymore now we have FWA.

The CEO took 3 pay cuts the previous years in order to bring the company to where it is now. He's also gave back $3,000,000 of his annual pay (http://on.fb.me/saxNOV). Also his 71% pay rise was because 97% were in favour of package.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iLOVENZB

The CEO took 3 pay cuts the previous years in order to bring the company to where it is now. He's also gave back $3,000,000 of his annual pay (http://on.fb.me/saxNOV). Also his 71% pay rise was because 97% were in favour of package.

---

When I can afford to give back 3 Million of my salary, I'll start backing CEO's and their plight.


As for poultry farming, I've heard of the awful situation people are put in- always borrowing money for "mandatory improvements", with very little to show. That's what corporations do when people back them.

I used to argue for right-wing politics. I can't anymore. Hell, the left has sold-out, too. I simply don't trust anyone seeking power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by megabyteme

I simply don't trust anyone seeking power.

---

That is about the only truth in politics

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Artemis

...
You must also remember the root of the financial crisis was leveraged debt, a major contributing factor being the sub-prime mortgages which had been sold for the last 10 years in the U.S. by various financial institutions which were then resold to other financial institutions world wide, while the whole sub-prime market collapsed through massive amounts of defaults on the loans.

These loans were specifically targeted at those who could not afford a mortgage and were therefore vulnerable, they offered a sub-prime (or less than the current rate for mortgages) for between 2 to 5 years and the lending criteria was extremely low on these. Once the full rate kicked in at maturity many of these same people were simply unable to pay, it was a financial house of cards which was always going to collapse, yet because of a complete lack of regulation in the U.S. and the fact that this debt was off-loaded to many financial institutions worldwide, the whole world got to share in the fallout from this greed. It is like an institutional ponzi scheme, only this one was perfectly legal if guaranteed to fail like all ponzi schemes eventually do.

I do believe unfettered capitalism without regulation like that practised in the U.S. has at it's heart a simple flaw, human greed, you only have to look at the Enron or WorldCom debacles to see what can happen, and despite all that has happened in the last 3 years there is still no regulation or controls being envisaged for the self same companies that (with the exception of those that collapsed) caused the financial crisis and it's ongoing effects.
...

---

Except it wasn't unregulated lending... in fact the only reason the subprime market existed was because it was legislated upon the banks...

See Government policies and the subprime mortgage crisis and The Government-Created Subprime Mortgage Meltdown.

That's what happens when you impose social policies upon a free market.

It's why the EFSF is going to fail. The market doesn't want governments promising a 2tr Euro fund, they want the governments to spend the 2tr Euros, thus providing them with opportunities to trade said Euros and make lots of money. Hence the pressure on the various 'troubled' Euro countries economies will continue, and the tax payers (socialists in government) of other Euro countries will loan out the money to 'bail out' economies whos only real hope is to accept they're fucked and pull out of the Euro. All of Europe is being dragged down by some idiotic socialist dream that globalised free markets can be controlled and/or tamed, via grand promises.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjmacky

Rooting for the destruction of unions is like rooting for one party systems. In that manner, it's asking for the balance of power to be left overwhelmingly unchecked, allowing one group with a common interest to exploit the rest with little recourse. Unions aren't supposed to be gracious angels farting pixie dust upon the microscale economies, but a bottom up countermeasure to prevent top down curb stomps. It's not that they're necessary, but having them around minimizes ass rape, they're like the rope on our soap.

---

Ah yes, the cheerleader for the unions has to say something about this.

Unions have caused a large portion of the problems the world economy currently faces. Their days are numbered. They will be abolished in the coming years as more and more people wake up to what they have done to us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

Ah yes, the cheerleader for the unions has to say something about this.

Unions have caused a large portion of the problems the world economy currently faces. Their days are numbered. They will be abolished in the coming years as more and more people wake up to what they have done to us.

---

Welcome back, I see you brought some empty rhetoric. You can set it over by the bottle of Miracle Whip. Also, if you think that's the equivalent of cheerleading, I feel sorry for your high school athletic clubs.

Typical union member tactics.