'Qantas Dispute\r'

'Qantas departure heads to judge, more(prenominal) pain in the ass possible Kelly Burke, Matthew OSullivan, Jessica Wright November 22, 2011 [pic] Alan Joyce… â€Å"the winners turn out of this be our customers”. pic: D all(prenominal)as Kilponen THE Qantas contest exit drag into nigh year and at that place is a curse of further heavy execute, with negotiations betwixt the tether unions and the airline collapsing within hours of the mandated deadline.\r\nDespite a push by the Transport manoeuverers fusion to extend the 21-day negotiation period, yesterday afternoon airline management walked away from talks with its ground crew, including baggage handlers and catering staff, little than an hour after doing the same with its hanker-haul pilots. ripe in the afternoon, Qantas and the third union locked in dispute, the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association, assentd to cry out it quits and hand the remaining unfastened issues †the u se of contractors and hiring staff from outside Australia †all over to the industrial relations umpire.\r\nThe process of attach arbitrement under somewhat Work Australia is expected to proceeds months as the umpire gathers evidence and calls for expert witnesses and written submissions. Although unlikely, disruptions to the holiday plans of thousands of Qantas passengers cannot be ruled out, with the TWU to decide on Thursday whether it will mount a legal challenge to Fair Works fellowship on October 31 to end getinate industrial accomplishment. The union has said it will look for a stay if it decides to challenge, which would allow its members to restart work stoppages over the Christmas and New family period.\r\nThe pilots union has already begun legal action against Fair Works decision with the first directions perceive in the Federal Court qualify down for December 1. But industrial law experts are skeptical approximately the likely success of the TWU and pi lots legal challenges. old Professor Ron McCallum, from the Sydney Law School, said it was exceedingly unlikely the Federal Court would duty assignment the TWU a stay, which would allow its members to take legal strike action. ‘The [unions case] would convey to successfully point that Fair Work acted contrary to the law, that they misconstrued their powers … and that will be very hard to do,” he said. The Transport Minister, Anthony Albanese, said in that location was a lack of seemliness and respect from all sides and the governments position on union moves to take legal action was iron clad. ”We dont post people taking legal action. We overhear an umpire and the umpire should be allowed to impart their decision. Were confident the courts would uphold that,” he said.\r\nThe workplace Relations Minister, Chris Evans, warned that further industrial action by any party would be unlawful. The federal secretary of the TWU, Tony Sheldon, said Qant as had trenchant to drag its employees through and through the courts quite than go to an extension of the conciliation period, where the issue of concern protection, including the number of contractors Qantas valued to use, were the sticking points. ”Qantas has not displayed good religion in these negotiations. The TWU wanted a sprint to the finish only when Qantas yet hopped on the treadmill.\r\nIt looked like they were pitiful precisely they werent going anywhere. ” The vice-president of the Australian and inter disciplineistic Pilots Association, Richard Woodward, said negotiations had ended after the deuce sides failed to agree over the terms for ability gains of up to 20 per cent in areas much(prenominal) as pilot rostering. ”charge obviously believes that a decision achieved through arbitration is preferable,” he said. â€Å"It is a pathos that Qantas as an airline will fork over to be subjected to this long, drawn-out process when a ne gotiated outcome was possible. ‘ Qantass chief executive, Alan Joyce, conceded that binding arbitration could take months but said it would lastly lead to agreements that could last as long as four years. He brush aside claims from the pilots union that Qantas never intended to tense up an agreement during the 21 days. ”Passengers can instantly travel with confidence. The winners out of this are our customers. The winners out of this are employees and our shareholders. They provoke certainty,” he said. http://www. smh. com. au/ calling/qantas-dispute-heads-to-umpire-more-pain-possible-20111122-1nrgj. tml Overview This article is a well-publicized national dispute between Qantas and it’s employees almost; pay, job security, and working conditions. The Qantas employee’s twisting in this dispute are; pilots, baggage handlers, engineers and the catering department. Analysis This industrial dispute between Qantas and its employees has been dragging o n for instead a some while now, and I would have to agree with some of the comments made in the article by the Transport Minister, Anthony Albanese, when he said, â€Å"there was a lack of goodwill and respect from all sides”.\r\nI agree with those comments made by the Transport Minister, because there appears to have been very minimal get on with made during the bargain process, prior to Fair Work Australia’s (FWA) intervention. Now that the dispute is going to arbitration it will be extremely interesting to see how the term dicker in good faith will be mediocreified and measured. I believe the term negociate in good faith to be quite open to disagreement, and it will be rather difficult to prove that any occurrence party was not acting in good faith. On the FWA website there is a description for good faith dicker which explains that; the good faith bargaining requirements that a bargaining representative for a proposed enterprisingness agreement must meet: à ¢â‚¬Â¢ attending, and act in, meetings at reasonable times • disclosing relevant information ( opposite than confidential or commercially sensitive information) in a seasonably manner • responding to proposals made by other bargaining representatives for the agreement in a timely manner • well-favoured literal consideration to the proposals of other bargaining representatives for the agreement, and giving reasons for the bargaining representatives responses to those proposals • refraining from capricious or partial conduct that undermines freedom of association or collective bargaining • recognising and bargaining with the other bargaining representatives for the agreement. The good faith bargaining requirements do not require a bargaining representative to: • even off concessions during bargaining for the agreement • reach agreement on the terms that are to be include in the agreement”. (http://www. fwa. gov. au/index. cfm? page name=agreementsdeterminations#good) I believe that globalization may have played a part in the lack of good faith bargaining in this EBA dispute, because the major sticking point in this dispute is job security for the employees, and Qantas can’t guarantee this whilst act its organizational strategic objectives.\r\nPart of Qantas’s long-term strategic plan is to progressively use contractual part time employees within Australia, as well as establishing some offshore workforces to fulfill roles such as engineering. Therefore, I think that Qantas had constantly intended to eventually use FWA to interact and assist in settling this dispute. I can completely empathize with the employee’s desires to ensure job security into the future, but I can also look the strategic organizational needs of Qantas management. just about people would argue that globalization is just a convenient management save for cost cutting, but there are definitely global pressures in i mmediately’s economic environment that make issues such as this extremely polished to strike a balance. Left-wing critics, til now argue that the demon of globalization is just a convenient management acknowledgment for cost-cutting and anti-union behavior designed to decollectivize the workplace and publicise market forces. The real problems for Australia’s competitiveness, concord to such critics, are not in unproductive workplaces, but in the boardrooms of banks, rangy corporations and other centers of financial power”. (Stone. R †pg. 541, 2008) Conclusion It is hard to know whether there was good faith bargaining displayed from both(prenominal) Qantas management and the unions during these negotiations, and that is some thing that the FWA judicial system will decide on.\r\nHowever, I do believe that if there were more consultation, ingenuousness and eventually trust built between both parties, there would have been more progress made before the FWA intervention. I would have also recommended that both parties swallow these negotiations by deciding which issues that they agree on going forward, and then start essay to negotiate the more difficult issues. By doing this both parties will slowly manikin some small amounts of trust, which helps to facilitate more consultation. References Book Stone. J Raymond -Human Resource solicitude 6th Edition, 2008. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. Milton, QLD 4064 Online http://www. smh. com. au/business/qantas-dispute-heads-to-umpire-more-pain-possible-20111122-1nrgj. html http://www. fwa. gov. au/index. cfm? pagename=agreementsdeterminations#good\r\n'