Qantas set for big fine after illegally sacking workers
The Federal Court will hand down a hefty penalty to Qantas on Monday in what will be the latest court blow for the airline after a scandal-plagued recent tenure.
Qantas outsourced its baggage handlers, cleaners and ground staff in 2020, in a move the court ruled was designed to curb union bargaining power in wage negotiations.
It appealed the ruling to the High Court but the decision was not overturned, paving the way for Monday's penalty.
The Transport Workers Union has sought the maximum penalty of $121 million, while Qantas has urged Justice Michael Lee to impose a "mid-range" penalty between $40 million and $80 million.
Qantas will cop the fine on top of a $120 million compensation payment it has made to the ground staff for their economic loss, pain and suffering since their jobs were outsourced during the pandemic.
It has argued the actions were a mistake, not a deliberate breach of the law.
Qantas also sold tickets to cancelled flights for several years, triggering more legal turmoil and a $100 million fine after it was sued by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.
The carrier, which was under the control of Alan Joyce at the time of the illegal sacking, lost billions of dollars during the pandemic, which decimated the aviation sector.
But the former CEO did not address the scandal when he spoke at an aviation conference on Thursday, instead spruiking his ability to keep the airline afloat in unprecedented times.
"But here's the real insight: resilience isn't a reaction … it's a decision made years in advance, often when it's uncomfortable, even unpopular," he said.
"Qantas was the only major Australian airline not to go bankrupt during or after the pandemic … that wasn't luck. That was resilience."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
18 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Google cops $55m fine for search engine deals on phones
Internet giant Google could pay a $55 million fine after signing anti-competitive deals with Australia's two largest telcos that banned the installation of competing search engines on some smartphones. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission launched proceedings against the US technology firm in Federal Court on Monday over the behaviour, which Google has admitted. The court will be asked to determine if the $55 million penalty agreed by both parties is appropriate. The legal action follows court-enforceable undertakings from Telstra, Optus and TPG in 2024 to refrain from renewing or making similar deals with Google to limit search services. The anti-competitive deals, in place between December 2019 and March 2021, required Telstra and Optus to pre-install Google's Search app on Android smartphones and to exclude competing search services from the devices. In exchange, the telcos received a share of revenue from advertisements shown alongside Google's search results on the phones. The deals struck by the technology companies unfairly restricted consumers' access to search engine options, commission chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said. "Conduct that restricts competition is illegal in Australia because it usually means less choice, higher costs or worse service for consumers," she said. "Today's outcome along with Telstra, Optus and TPG's undertakings have created the potential for millions of Australians to have greater search choice in the future, and for competing search providers to gain meaningful exposure to Australian consumers." In addition to admitting the deals could have reduced competition, Google has agreed not to require similar restrictions on search services in future contracts with smartphone manufacturers and telecommunication providers. The changes would become increasingly important, Ms Cass-Gottlieb said, as the search engine market was challenged by firms deploying artificial intelligence to deliver different results. "With AI search tools becoming increasingly available, consumers can experiment with search services on their mobiles," she said. The Federal Court in Victoria will determine whether the $55 million is appropriate and if "other relief" should apply. Google Australia issued a statement about the case on Monday, saying similar agreements that restricted search services from other companies were no longer being sought by the company. "We're pleased to resolve the ACCC's concerns, which involved provisions that haven't been in our commercial agreements for some time," the statement said. "We are committed to providing Android device makers more flexibility to preload browsers and search apps, while preserving the offerings and features that help them innovate, compete with Apple and keep costs low." The commission investigated internet competition as part of a five-year inquiry into digital platforms, issuing its final report in March. Google dominates search engine queries in Australia, with Statcounter Global Statistics estimating it delivered 91.7 per cent of search results in July, followed by Bing (5.6 per cent) and Yahoo (1.28 per cent).
AU Financial Review
an hour ago
- AU Financial Review
Why more businesses are taking control of their supply chains
'As a business, you do not want to spend too much money holding products because storage takes up space and ties up capital. Just-in-time means you only order as needed and save on storage and capital costs,' he says. But for that to work, you need a reliable supply. 'The issue is that Australia manufactures very little. You cannot just say, 'I need something, make it now,' and expect it within a day or two,' says Linn. 'Almost everything has to be imported, and the lead time is often one, two, or three months. Air freight is also too expensive.' 'For just-in-time to work in Australia, you need companies like Livingstone International that carry large volumes of stock and can provide immediate supply,' Linn says. During COVID, many suppliers came up short. With no inventory on hand and no contingency in place, they simply had nothing to offer. Linn says his firm became a critical supplier for a broad customer base during this period, largely because it had invested in depth of inventory and domestic warehousing well before the crisis hit. That strategy is now being formalised through guaranteed availability programs – including a no backorder program that hinges on long-term investment in stock and space. 'The idea of eliminating backorders is simple. If you have enough stock, you will not have backorders,' says Linn. 'But achieving that is not so simple because it requires significant investment. A supplier needs to invest heavily in inventory and warehouse space. Without those, backorders are inevitable. 'Livingstone has made that investment. We are a national company with capital behind us, and that allows us to support our clients properly.' Rather than simply promise low prices, the firm makes volume commitments to strategic customers, often holding a full year's supply of inventory on their behalf. Linn says this level of support builds trust and fosters long-term relationships, particularly among organisations that experienced supply failures during the pandemic. Those industries – hospitals, aged care providers, schools and large service operators – are now shifting their behaviour. Where price once ruled, continuity and certainty are now paramount. 'We serve essential industries such as healthcare, aged care, beauty, and education,' says Linn. 'These are not luxury categories. When people in these sectors need supplies, they need them immediately. You cannot afford to wait. Delays mean disruptions to patient care, halted procedures, or paused operations. That is not acceptable in critical environments. 'Now, clients want strategic relationships, not just price-based transactions. They are asking us to commit to them, and in return, they commit to us. They share their consumption volumes, and we invest in holding that inventory specifically for them.' It's not only B2B customers driving this change. Livingstone's scale and stockholding capacity also benefit everyday consumers, especially via its tiered pricing model. 'Our system allows customers to buy more and save more, regardless of order size,' Linn says. 'It ties back to our core value of passing savings directly to customers.' The company's IT infrastructure is also driving visibility and growth across B2C platforms. 'Our IT infrastructure is so good that major retailers have invited us to join them as a merchant,' Linn says. 'This has driven significant customer uptake for them by leveraging our wide range of brands and products. 'By expanding into new portals, we're making it simpler for customers to discover and purchase Livingstone International's trusted range of products through their preferred platforms.' JIT is a model that demands mutual trust – and a significant capital outlay from the supplier. But Linn says it pays off by reducing the kind of reactive scrambles that defined the early days of the pandemic. Cost pressures, meanwhile, are being offset through scale and automation. Linn says the firm's warehouse network spans millions of cubic metres, and its use of radio frequency systems, barcoding and precision picking drives efficiency throughout the fulfilment process. 'As a large importer and distributor, we have strong buying power. That allows us to work with manufacturers at scale, which brings their production costs down. They pass on the savings to us, and we pass it on to our clients,' he says. 'We also operate large warehouses, which makes our cost per pallet or cubic metre lower than smaller suppliers. Because we work with millions of cubic metres of warehouse space, we are much more efficient.' While the conversation about sovereign capability often centres on energy or defence, logistics insiders argue that procurement strategies are just as critical. Having inventory available locally – even if it means carrying more stock – is no longer seen as wasteful. It's insurance. In a recent submission to the Productivity Commission, the Australian Logistics Council (ALC) the nation's peak logistics industry body, described resilient supply chains as 'essential to safeguarding the productivity and sovereignty of Australia's economy'. The ALC warned that regulatory and infrastructure gaps were leaving businesses exposed to supply shocks and fuelling inefficiencies. The council called on governments to adopt a 'risk-based, forward-looking regulation that anticipates disruption scenarios,' enabling long-term investment in resilience. And it urged policy reforms to support 'domestic stockholding and distribution capability', noting that 'a diversified freight network … ensures greater continuity when specific corridors are compromised'. These structural shifts are already underway in parts of the private sector. Linn says many of Livingstone's major customers are now moving away from transactional supply relationships. Instead, they're seeking longer-term guarantees backed by inventory depth, which in turn requires a significant outlay by the supplier. 'We trust our clients to honour their commitments, and they trust us to carry the stock. It's mutual,' he says. 'If you visit our warehouse, you will see we hold significant stock for our key customers. Many of them operate just-in-time models, but they can only do that successfully because we have the infrastructure and inventory behind it.' The ALC agrees that the old model must evolve. In its submission, it said governments and business should plan for 'disruption as the default, not the exception,' and treat 'supply chain risk like financial risk – priced, insured against, and mitigated through redundancy and transparency'. The group also called for consistent regulatory co-ordination to support these shifts, arguing that 'Australia's freight sector is limited by fragmented regulation… and weak national co-ordination.' It warned that 'delays and duplication in freight infrastructure planning' were slowing down industry-led efforts to build resilience. Among its top recommendations: establish a National Supply Chain Resilience Framework, accelerate infrastructure approvals, and provide incentives for warehouse investment. These, it said, were not just productivity levers – but prerequisites for economic security. 'If Australia does not prioritise supply chain resilience,' the submission says, 'it risks becoming a less attractive place to invest, and less capable of protecting its own communities in a crisis.' As the world remains in flux, supply certainty has become a competitive advantage. For many Australian businesses, the ability to deliver on time and at scale is no longer just a procurement decision – it's a business-critical strategy. Livingstone difference today.
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
‘Absolute priority': NAB underpays staff $130m
A big-four bank has revealed it will pay back workers $130m due to a payroll system problem at the same time that it announced an eye-watering profit. In its latest quarterly results, NAB announced a slight increase in third-quarter profits while pointing to a jump in operating expenses due to back paying workers. According to the bank, operating expenses were up 4.5 per cent on last year as it dealt with payroll issues estimated to come in at $130m for the 2025 financial year. The bank did not say how many employees need to be back paid. 'NAB payroll review and remediation is ongoing and total costs remain uncertain,' the bank said. The payroll review first began in 2019 and led to costs of more than $250m between 2020 and 2022. In 2020, NAB said it had underpayments to staff dating back all the way to October 2012. Moving staff to a new enterprise agreement in 2024 identified further payroll issues. As a result, NAB has initiated a broader review into payroll-related benefits. NAB group executive people and culture Sarah White said a dedicated team was continuing to investigate and resolve issues, remediate colleagues and ensure sustained future compliance. 'Paying our colleagues correctly is an absolute priority,' she said. 'We are sorry and apologise to our colleagues that this has happened and have commenced remediating those impacted.' Meanwhile, NAB reported a slight increase in third-quarter cash earnings on the back of improved margins and growth in both business and home lending. NAB made $1.77bn for the three months ending June 30, up from $1.75bn this time last year. NAB said business lending grew 4 per cent and Australian home lending grew 2 per cent during the quarter. Net interest margins increased 8 basis points. Expenses were also up 3 per cent on the back of higher staff costs, investment in new technology and remediation costs. Bank deposits were largely stable over the quarter but are up 6 per cent over the nine months to June 30. The major lender also booked a credit impairment charge of $254m in the quarter, mainly related to business lending in Australia and New Zealand as well as unsecured Australian retail portfolios. NAB chief executive Andrew Irvine said focusing on key priorities led to Monday's result. 'We remain optimistic about the outlook and are well placed to manage NAB for the long term and deliver sustainable growth and returns for shareholders,' he said.
