Overview
2.1
Particular industries have borne the brunt of the public health measures implemented to contain COVID-19, with aviation amongst the first to feel the full economic impact of the lockdown. As noted in Chapter 1, border closures, limits on non-essential travel and stay at home orders have caused an unprecedented decline in air travel. In response, the Australian Government implemented a range of measures to assist the aviation sector, including temporary programs to subsidise the cost of operating a minimum domestic aviation network.
2.2
This chapter explores measures put in place by the Australian Government to support the aviation sector in response to COVID-19. In particular, it concentrates on evidence received by the committee in relation to JobKeeper, including eligibility criteria and the impact of these on the aviation workforce.
Overview of financial support for aviation in response to COVID-19
2.3
The Australian Government's COVID-19 economic response encompassed a number of measures to support sectors particularly impacted by COVID-19 and associated travel restrictions.
2.4
On 28 March 2020, two new grant programs were announced as part of the Australian Government's $1 billion COVID-19 Relief and Recovery Fund: the Regional Airlines Funding Assistance program and the Regional Airline Networks Support (RANS) program:
Between April and December 2020, $100 million was made available to deliver last-resort cash flow assistance to regional airlines that provide essential services to regional and remote locations through the Regional Airlines Funding Assistance program.
The committee understands that of the $70.6 million that has been paid out through the Regional Airlines Funding Assistance program, $53.9 million was paid to Rex Airlines, despite its offering a relatively small share of daily seats to regional ports pre-COVID-19, compared to the Qantas Group (Qantas) and Virgin Australia (Virgin), both of whom were ineligible for the program.
The committee heard that Rex Airlines received more than 76 per cent of the total funding allocated under the Regional Airlines Funding Assistance program, which provided last-resort cash flow assistance, despite Rex Airlines recording in its 2020 Annual Report an increase in revenue, and an underlying profit, excluding the $53.9 million received through the program.
The RANS program is providing support to ensure minimum air connectivity to over 110 airports in regional and remote Australia from March 2020 to 28 March 2021.
2.5
On 17 March 2020, the Australian Government announced relief measures for the Qantas, Virgin and regional airlines affected by COVID-19 (the Australian Airline Financial Relief Package). Overall, the Australian Airline Financial Relief Package provided $715 million in direct and indirect support to airlines, through fee-waivers, changes to operations charges and some limited direct financial assistance to 31 December 2020. The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications (Department of Infrastructure) informed the committee that, as at 30 November 2020, the total benefit to industry in direct rebates for fuel excise and domestic security costs was $126.3 million. Additionally, the total charges waived for 1300 domestic flight operators came to $145.8 million.
2.6
The following month, the Australian Government announced the $165 million Domestic Aviation Network Support (DANS) program to subsidise the cost of operating a minimum domestic aviation network. The DANS program provided shortfall subsidies to four domestic commercial airlines to operate flights along the top 50 domestic routes from 16 April 2020 to 31 January 2021.
2.7
Further measures put in place by the Australian Government to support the aviation sector are outlined below:
The $66 million Regional Airports Screening Infrastructure program was introduced to provide a funding contribution towards the minimum necessary capital and initial operational costs of enhanced security screening at eligible regional airports.
Under the International Freight Assistance Mechanism (IFAM), $669 million has been committed to 30 June 2021 to maintain established supply-chains that support industries delivering high-value, time-sensitive, perishable and vital imports and exports. According to the Department of Infrastructure, IFAM funding supported transport of over 252 000 tonnes of air freight and reconnected supply chains to around 67 international destinations between April and 9 December 2020.
Federally-leased airports were provided temporary relief and deferrals from land tax-equivalent payments if they provided rent relief to commercial tenants during the crisis.
International comparison
2.8
Many jurisdictions introduced support measures for aviation in response to COVID-19. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reported that two-thirds of that support consisted of direct aid (subsidies, loans, equity and cash injection). In addition, countries such as Australia, Singapore and the United Kingdom (UK) adopted wage subsidies to help employers maintain a connection with their workers.
2.9
Submitters raised concern regarding the level of support provided by the Australian Government to the aviation sector, compared to that of other nations. In a report commissioned by the International Transport Workers' Federation, the McKell Institute indicated that aviation support from the Australian Government totals $2.7 billion, or approximately 0.136 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), compared to a mean of 0.24 per cent of GDP in support provided by countries analysed by the McKell Institute. According to the OECD, the Australian Government's support for the aviation industry ranks 18 out of the 28 countries it analysed.
2.10
Additionally, the McKell Institute cited analysis undertaken by the World Bank regarding the size of support for the aviation industry, relative to the overall size of the relevant governments' support by way of economic stimulus in the context of COVID-19. This study found that Australia ranks poorly on this comparison, with only 0.33 per cent of our stimulus package being spent on aviation, compared to 2.4 per cent of the stimulus provided by both the United States of America (US) and New Zealand.
2.11
Mr Scott McDine, Head of ITF Sydney, International Transport Workers' Federation, argued that the Australian Government should exceed the support packages of other governments for Australia's aviation industry, including airlines. In particular, he noted that the Singaporean government had provided the highest tier of support to aviation, aerospace and tourism workers under its Jobs Support Scheme (JSS), in recognition of the importance of aviation. This originally amounted to 75 per cent of average take-home weekly wages and has since been reduced to 50 per cent.
2.12
Mr McDine contended that this higher rate of wage subsidy had significantly reduced the number of aviation job losses. He observed that Australian airlines have experienced job losses at 31.1 per cent, compared with 19.5 per cent in the US and 15.6 per cent in Singapore.
2.13
The committee inquired whether there was a correlation between the level of financial support provided to the Australian aviation sector, relative to most OECD countries, and the proportion of job losses, relative to other countries. Mr Brine, First Assistant Secretary, Environment, Industry and Infrastructure Division, Department of the Treasury, accepted the existence of the correlation.
2.14
The Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA) also praised the responses of other governments. Specifically, Captain Murray Butt, President, AIPA, stated that:
We have seen Singapore invest over A$20 billion into its airline. The US has been supporting the aviation industry such that all airline staff have been on 75 per cent of their salary. In the UK, staff have been on 80 per cent of their salary, and New Zealand is paying its airline staff 50 per cent of their salary until 2022. They recognise the importance of the sector and the retention of skills crucial for their infrastructure.
2.15
The committee notes that the US' COVID-19 relief bill which passed on
10 March 2021 included an additional $23 billion in support for the aviation sector. The measures to date have reportedly saved 27 000 jobs at American Airlines and United Airlines alone.
JobKeeper
2.16
The Australian Government responded to the first phase of the pandemic with three economic support packages. The third economic support package, announced on 30 March 2020, established a new wage subsidy in the form of JobKeeper, which initially provided a $1500 fortnightly wage subsidy to eligible employees of businesses that could demonstrate a sufficient decline in revenue during the pandemic. JobKeeper was designed to help keep Australians employed as large parts of the economy went into 'hibernation'. It provided payments that enabled businesses to retain their employees where COVID-19 restrictions on movement reduced revenues.
2.17
For many Australian businesses and workers, the fallout from public health measures was immediate. By April 2020, the number of employed Australians had fallen by a total of 594 300—including 220 500 from full-time employment and 373 800 from part-time employment. 828 300 people were unemployed and the underemployment rate had increased to 13.7 per cent.
2.18
From April 2020, JobKeeper was supporting 850 000 organisations to pay
3.3 million working Australians a wage to live on in the absence of normal business operating conditions. According to Mr Brine this included:
…over 300 unique entities in the air and space transport… covering on average around 31 000 employees per month and delivering assistance of around $250 million to the sector [during the first quarter of the extension phase of JobKeeper].
2.19
On 21 July 2020, the Australian Government announced that due to the ongoing COVID-19 crisis, JobKeeper would be extended by six months until
28 March 2021, from the original end date of 27 September 2020. From
28 September 2020, the payment rate was reduced and a lower payment rate introduced for those who worked fewer hours. The JobKeeper payment is currently due to finish on 28 March 2021.
2.20
The majority of submitters voiced support for JobKeeper. For example, Mr Scott Connolly, Assistant Secretary, Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), stated that '[t]here's no question that JobKeeper has played a significant role in enabling the industry to survive and get to where it is today'.
2.21
Ms Jayne Hrdlicka, Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of Virgin, stated that JobKeeper had been essential for Virgin and the thousands of employees it had stood down throughout the pandemic:
JobKeeper has meant that we have been able to keep the family together and retain thousands and thousands of skilled jobs that would otherwise not have been possible and to protect the integrity and resilience of our operations in an environment where the pandemic and border closures have caused demand to be highly variable, with no ability to plan and predict what tomorrow will bring.
2.22
Similarly, Mr John Sharp, Deputy Chairman, Rex Airlines, commented that JobKeeper has 'enabled us to keep people stood down, but paid, and it enables us to bring people back into the workforce when things are picking up'.
2.23
Mr Alistair Reid, Member, Australian Aviation Ground Handling Industry Alliance, stated that the $66 million received by Menzies Aviation through JobKeeper 'has enabled us to keep the staff attached to the business'.
2.24
Captain Louise Pole, President, Australian Federation of Air Pilots, argued that JobKeeper has allowed a number of employees to maintain a connection with their employer, albeit with a reduced income in many cases. She called for the Australian Government to extend JobKeeper and argued that without it 'you will find more and more pilots considering leaving the industry permanently…'.
2.25
Mr Daniel Gschwind, Chief Executive, Queensland Tourism Industry Council, told the committee that 'some businesses will not be able to survive without some additional support'. He recommended that Australian businesses severely impacted by international border closures and domestic disruption be given access to a wage subsidy program beyond 28 March 2021.
2.26
The Flight Attendants' Association of Australia (FAAA) agreed that JobKeeper had saved jobs and helped employees maintain their connection with their employer. In particular, it shared the results of surveys undertaken in relation to the impact of JobKeeper on cabin crew in 2020 and 2021 which found that JobKeeper had positively impacted 96.9 per cent of survey respondents.
2.27
Aviation workers also emphasised the vital role that JobKeeper has played in keeping them connected with employment. Ms Anna-Maria Saglimbeni told the committee that '[t]he support the government has provided through the JobKeeper has kept my family afloat, financially, and has been a lifeline for me'.
2.28
Ms Teri O'Toole, Federal Secretary, FAAA, relayed the following statements from the FAAA's members:
'My wife and I are both flight attendants. The shutdown has had huge financial ramifications for us. We have both managed to find some casual work. However, this is on a week-by-week basis. Without JobKeeper we would not have survived'.
'We're struggling to put food on the table and pay bills and our mortgage as my husband is also a pilot and he is stood down. Without JobKeeper we would not have been able to make our financial commitments. JobKeeper has also had a positive impact on our mental health'.
'I've been able to remain in employment at Qantas and keep food on the table. Without this support, I would have to have moved back to South Australia and possibly be split from my husband whilst I am pregnant with our first child'.
2.29
Meanwhile, Ms Tanana asserted that '[s]hould JobKeeper be discontinued, our employer will have to discontinue the employment of thousands more staff'. She argued that '[JobKeeper] is an investment in the families and livelihoods of people in the industry and in this country. We need the funding to help us through'.
Eligible employees
2.30
While the majority of submitters supported a large-scale wage subsidy, a number of submitters highlighted problems with JobKeeper: namely, the exclusion of many aviation workers from the scheme. For example, Mr James Goodwin, Chief Executive, Australian Airports Association (AAA), noted that while eligible airports are thankful for JobKeeper:
…there are many organisations in the value chain of aviation that go unseen: ground handlers, people working behind the scenes in baggage handling, people in refuelling, people making sure that the airfield is safe and secure. Many of that workforce are going unseen by those who are on an aircraft, but they are vital. They are essential workers and, regardless of the company structure, they are workers in Australia and paying taxes in Australia. It's important that they are supported during this period.
2.31
In its first interim report, the Select Committee on COVID-19 noted that in the initial design of the program the Australian Government made some deliberate exclusions primarily on the basis that, at a projected imposition of $130 billion on public finances, they needed to impose limits on the cost of the package. It received evidence that many of these exclusions severely impacted workers and industries who had been hardest hit by the pandemic.
2.32
These exclusions cost thousands of Australian aviation workers access to a crucial lifeline during an unprecedented jobs crisis, including:
casual employees who could not demonstrate 12 months of continuous employment with the same employer;
all employees of local government (194 000 people)—including workers in council-operated airports; and
all employees of companies owned by foreign governments—including several thousand dnata workers.
Casual employees
2.33
Some submitters questioned the Australian Government's decision to exclude casuals who had not been with their employer for at least 12 months.
2.34
The committee heard evidence that the vast majority of aviation workers are employed on a permanent part time or casual basis. For example, the Transport Workers' Union (TWU) submitted that Swissport, a ground and cargo handling services provider, employs all of its workers, save for senior managers, on a permanent part-time or casual basis. It also noted that '[p]art-time work has also become the dominant form of employment at all companies across ground handling operations'. For example, approximately 90 per cent of the Qantas Ground Services workforce is either part-time or casual.
2.35
Ms Marian Harris, a cabin cleaner employed by Cabin Services Australia, told the committee that this exclusion disproportionately impacted the aviation sector, where '95 per cent of [dnata's] workers are casual'.
2.36
The ACTU observed that '[m]any [aviation workers] were casuals who did not meet the tenure requirement the government put in place'. In addition, Mr Connolly drew the committee's attention to what he termed 'fundamental failings' with the package:
In this sector, in particular, there are some challenges with the transitory nature of some of the workers—not by their choice, but by the design of their employment relationships being casual and insecure. They've been disadvantaged in terms of their capacity to receive the benefits.
2.37
Furthermore, in its report Australian Aviation and COVID-19, the McKell Institute noted that some elements of the JobKeeper design were severely deficient: 'namely, its lack of application to companies owned by a sovereign entity, such as dnata, and the exclusion of recently hired casuals'.
2.38
The Treasurer had previously justified excluding more than one million casual workers from JobKeeper using the rationale that 'at $130 billion… we had to draw the line somewhere. This is a massive call on the public purse and it is a debt that the country will pay for years to come…'.
Local government
2.39
Local governments employ approximately 194 000 people, all of whom were excluded under JobKeeper eligibility rules. The committee heard evidence that the exclusion of local governments from JobKeeper disproportionately affected council-operated airports and the communities they serve in regional and remote Australia.
2.40
The majority of registered airports in Australia are owned and operated by local government. Indeed, more than 200 regional, rural and remote
council-owned airports provide aviation services to their populations, as well as providing vital services to local health, education and other providers and local businesses.
2.41
The Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) submitted that '[t]hese airports are needed for everything from passenger transport to [] tourism, postal services, air ambulances, emergency services operations, crop dusting, surveying and flight training'. It further noted that the impact of COVID-19 has severely impacted the revenue that local governments draw from their airports and, in some cases, this has put their ongoing operation at risk.
2.42
Mr Adrian Beresford-Wylie, Chief Executive, ALGA, argued that it was a 'bitter disappointment' that local government employees were excluded from JobKeeper. He pointed out that councils are not motivated by profit, but instead 'undertake a lot of activities in thin markets where there aren't private sector suppliers' to provide benefit to their communities.
2.43
The AAA contended that the exclusion of employees of local governments from JobKeeper eligibility has resulted in skilled workers leaving the aviation industry. It argued that this represents a significant loss of competency, skills and experience in airport operations and will slow the restart of the aviation industry through the need to re-certify, re-qualify and re-accredit staff returning to the sector.
2.44
In addition, Mr Goodwin called for JobKeeper to be extended to cover local government staff employed in the aviation sector. He argued that if JobKeeper were not extended there is a 'very real threat that many airport operations would become unsustainable' and 'it would be a devastating blow to many regional areas if it were to occur'.
2.45
Mr Trevor Willcock, Chief Executive Officer, Mildura Airport, provided insight into the experience of council-owned regional airports. He explained that Mildura Airport was corporatised in 2008, but remains owned by Mildura Rural City Council. As a result, it did not qualify for JobKeeper. Mr Willcock revealed that Mildura Airport can only absorb further operational losses for a further 6 to 12 months before all cash reserves have been depleted. He contended that an extension to JobKeeper for a further 12 months to all airport employees, regardless of ownership structures, is '[v]ery essential' and 'would go a long way in keeping us compliant, safe and open'.
2.46
The AAA estimated that more than 70 per cent of staff at regional airports have been placed on reduced hours, been re-deployed or made redundant.
2.47
Similarly, the ACTU noted that most regional airports are council-owned and are not well-capitalised or self-sustaining in terms of direct fees received for use. It submitted that '[w]hat this means is that ultimately shortfalls are met through general council revenue, meaning that regional airports are predominantly supported by ratepayers'.
Australian companies owned by foreign sovereign entities
2.48
Employees of companies owned by sovereign entities were also excluded from JobKeeper due to a 'deliberate decision to refine the policy'. As a direct result of this exclusion, thousands of Australian aviation workers faced job losses, including over 5500 staff in aviation catering and ground handling business dnata.
2.49
Mr Hiranjan Aloysius, Chief Executive Officer, dnata Catering Australia, explained that prior to COVID-19, dnata employed approximately 6800 people in Australia. Since April 2020, some 2500 dnata workers have been made redundant. Mr Aloysius told the committee that hundreds of these jobs could have been saved if JobKeeper had been extended to dnata.
2.50
A number of submitters criticised this exclusion, with some going so far as to describe the treatment of these workers as 'gobsmacking' and an 'absolute disgrace'. In particular, these submitters highlighted the sale of Qantas' catering business to dnata in 2018. Following completion of the sale, 1200 Qantas employees become part of the dnata operation. The committee heard evidence that despite having no say in this decision these workers were, as a direct result, excluded from JobKeeper.
2.51
The TWU noted that '[t]hese workers are paid in Australia and pay taxes in Australia'. Mr Michael Kaine, National Secretary, TWU, argued that 'it was Australian workers [the Australian Government] were depriving of money'. The TWU submitted:
Over a thousand of the workers were originally employed by Qantas, until the airline sold its Q Catering arm to Emirates-owned Dnata in 2018. The Federal Government did not intervene in the sale of an Australian business to a foreign-owned business, yet used this distinction to exclude thousands of tax-paying workers from wage subsidy support.
2.52
The TWU further noted that '[a]lthough the changes impacted aviation workers at Dnata and SNP, Swissport, which is owned by Chinese controlled HNA, continued to receive the subsidy'.
2.53
The AAA expressed concern that the 'exclusion of foreign-owned firms from JobKeeper eligibility also cut out many links in the aviation value chain from income support, including ground handling and security screening firms'.
2.54
Submitters questioned why they should be excluded from JobKeeper on this basis. Ms Harris asked 'We pay our taxes. We're foreign owned. How come they take it off us?'
2.55
Mr Brian Bevan submitted that:
The reason given to us was that our company was owned by a foreign government. But what does that mean to me? I'm a tax-paying Australian. Not a dollar of my money goes offshore.
2.56
In addition, Ms Edesse Hakko stated:
I am an Australian citizen, I was born and raised here and I pay taxes. But, because my company was owned by a foreign government, I did not receive JobKeeper. I am disgusted that we were left with no support from the Australian government yet there were people who weren't working getting one-off payments. What happened to us, the hardworking workers?
2.57
Similarly, Ms Darlene Bailey expressed her frustration that as a former Qantas employee who had been 'sold' to dnata in 2018 she was ineligible for JobKeeper 'through no fault of [her] own'.
2.58
When questioned regarding the rationale behind excluding the employees of entities that are wholly owned by foreign governments, the Department of the Treasury responded that '[r]eally those governments should support the companies that they own'. However, Mr Aloysius noted that dnata's exclusion from government support is unique to Australia. For example, Mr McDine noted that all aviation workers in Singapore, including dnata employees, are eligible for JSS.
Misuse of JobKeeper
2.59
The committee heard evidence that some aviation employers have 'used the cover of the pandemic to reduce conditions, outsource jobs, and implement restructures'. For example, Mr Connolly informed the committee that there have been some abuses of JobKeeper, including 'manipulation of rostering systems to take advantage of and profit from the scheme'.
2.60
The TWU argued that Qantas had arbitrarily enforced an inflexible and unworkable method to the stand down of its workers across Australia. In particular, it submitted that 'Qantas began engaging part-time QGS staff to fill full-time Qantas Airways staff roles, and standing those workers down instead'.
2.61
The TWU also criticised the absence of any conditions tied to JobKeeper to ensure appropriate use of funds:
No demands were made on retaining jobs, ruling out outsourcing, committing to regional Australia, keeping fares affordable, capping CEO salaries, cancelling executive bonuses or cancelling dividends.
2.62
The TWU argued that JobKeeper relies on companies to behave conscionably, 'leaving workers powerless and reliant upon their employer to claim and pass on the full amount of the subsidy'. In particular, it expressed concern that the Australian Government's 'failure to intervene and apply funding with conditions to ensure vital regional air services continue is leaving the survival of regional Australian communities in the hands of airline executives and their profit-based priorities'.
2.63
The Australian Services Union (ASU) outlined a number of specific examples of what it categorised as poor employer behaviour. These included the following:
Qantas manipulated the JobKeeper scheme to reduce the take home pay of some employees who work overtime and hours that attract penalty rates.
Qantas made several thousand employees redundant based on their projected need for labour in 2022. This was described by the company as a 'right-sizing process'. These include several hundred employees at airports, lounges and corporate areas. Following the right-sizing process, Qantas proposed to restructure its airport, lounges and freight operations. According to the ASU, this restructure targeted better paid, high-skilled staff, shifting the work to centralised call-centres.
Virgin made thousands of employees redundant and sought long term wage freezes and drastic permanent cuts to conditions from its workforce.
Rex Airlines attempted to vary their enterprise agreements covering customer service staff, flight attendants and aircraft engineers to remove pay increases due to employees on 1 July 2020.
2.64
Furthermore, the TWU suggested that Qantas was using the COVID-19 pandemic to provide an excuse to outsource this workforce 'in order to cut the existing wages and conditions to the minimum standards, or below'.
2.65
The ASU also contended that airlines misused the JobKeeper payment to subsidise overtime payments. For example, it claimed that Menzies Aviation forced its employees to use their accrued leave while they were stood down and being paid JobKeeper. For many employees, they saw no additional income while their accrued leave balances were run down. The ASU argued that this meant that the company reduced its accrued liabilities using taxpayer money without offering any benefit to the affected employees.
2.66
Mr Toohey, a former Qantas employee, raised concern that Qantas had used JobKeeper to pay off leave entitlements. He noted that '[t]here are guys who now have no annual leave, nothing in their redundancies…'. In addition, Mr Peter Seymour described his personal experience as a Qantas employee who, after 31 years of employment, was on paid sick leave following a stage 5 prostate cancer diagnosis:
Then the pandemic hit and JobKeeper was introduced, and I was on sick leave and just managing to cover bills. Then, without any warning, Mr Joyce, the CEO of Qantas, decided to take staff off sick leave and put them on JobKeeper and stand down staff for weeks at a time.
2.67
Moreover, Mr Seymour described being refused overtime, despite working on a rostered day off. He informed the committee that:
In that two-week period, [Qantas] put you on from Monday to Thursday. They give you Friday off, Saturday off and Sunday off so they don't have to pay penalty rates. Then they put you back on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday.
2.68
Relevant to this inquiry, Qantas is currently engaged in litigation over its alleged misuse of JobKeeper. On 13 January 2021, the TWU, ASU, FAAA and the ACTU sought leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia, arguing that employers should not be able to use JobKeeper to pay penalties. The High Court is yet to hear this special leave application.
Committee view
2.69
The committee agrees with the views of submitters that the effect of the financial support discussed above has been crucial in saving jobs, maintaining air connectivity and protecting supply lines. In particular, JobKeeper has been critical in preserving aviation capacity and providing much needed financial support to employees of the severely impacted aviation industry.
2.70
Whilst welcoming the economic support measures put in place by the Australian Government, the committee believes that are some issues with the timing and design of the packages and that the Australian Government should have expanded JobKeeper eligibility to cover all tax-paying aviation workers.
2.71
The Australian Government's last-minute decision to exclude employees of foreign government entities from JobKeeper eligibility caused thousands of workers to be disqualified from the Australian Government's wage subsidy program. If JobKeeper had been designed to include all aviation workers, many more jobs could have been saved.
2.72
The committee shares the view of the Select Committee on COVID-19 that unnecessarily excluding many of the people and sectors hardest-hit by the pandemic has undermined the economic benefits of JobKeeper and its goal of keeping as many workers employed as possible.
2.73
The committee also notes the correlation between the low level of financial support provided by the Australian Government to the aviation sector, relative to other OECD countries, and the relatively high proportion of Australian aviation job losses.
2.74
Furthermore, the evidence presented to the committee called into question the behaviour of certain employers in the aviation sector, such as Qantas. The committee finds that the decision of Qantas to outsource 2500 ground handling roles, notwithstanding being in receipt of significant government funding, goes against the spirit of JobKeeper. Despite the significant amount of financial assistance these companies have received from the Australian Government in order to keep workers employed, thousands of aviation workers have had their employment terminated, conditions cut and roles outsourced. This is discussed further in the following chapter.