Qantas Case Study

757 Words2 Pages

5. Legislation – Qantas Sale Act

Between 1992 and 1995 the Australian government completed the privatisation of Qantas, the Australian Parliament also passed legislation referred as the Qantas Sale Act 1992 (QSA). The Department of Parliamentary Services (2014) reports that under this legislation foreign ownership was capped and the airlines brand ‘QANTAS’ and operations must remain substantially in Australia.

In 2014 the Australian Parliament passed amendments to repeal those rules in the Qantas Sale Act (1992), in addition though QANTAS must still comply with legislation under the Air Navigation Act 1920. This legislation means that Qantas must be able to demonstrate that ownership of its International operations are substantially …show more content…

The board has structured itself to meet the requirements of the ASX (2014)

1. Board Structure

The composition of the board is clearly documented in the Charter that the board must be majority Independent Non-Executive Director (INED) and only the CEO position. The chairman role is also outlined and that the incumbent must be an INED who an Australian citizen is appointed by the board. The Chairman is not to excise the role of CEO of Qantas and must not have held that position previous.
2. Board Independence

In line with ASX (2014) recommendation 1.2 Qantas is very articulate around the Independence of a director and their responsibilities to inform the board of their interests outside of Qantas.

3. Board Size

As explained previously by Lipman (2007) board sizes should vary between no less than four directors or greater than ten. As outlined on Qantas.com.au (2015) Board of Directors are currently made up of nine members and in February 2015 will become ten members of which 9 will be INED and the CEO.

4. …show more content…

The Qantas board as outlined in their past financial year results has not been delivering this and the market has particularly focused on this. Under the board committees of Audit and Safety, Health, Environment and Security the company results indicate that the board is not fulfilling their duties to ensure that enterprise-wide risks and compliance to the framework are being delivered on. There is also the question on if the board is under ASX (2014) recommendation 1.1 is providing the right leadership and setting of the company strategy as well as monitoring the execution and providing appropriate approvals of the operating budgets and major capital expenditure in the interest of the shareholder considering the large losses the company has

Open Document