Part 2:
Ryanair is very much an airline of individuals working for the same employer. The airline apparently does not encourage a sense of common purpose. As a consequence there is often a feeling of impotence against a very assertive and powerful management. Pilots feel uncertain as to their rights and this state of affairs is unlikely to be by accident. It is certainly true that any collective action challenging Ryanair has typically been a very painful and difficult process. Many pilots tend to be relatively apathetic in the face of such difficulties and rationalise their situation as being temporary and, hence, acceptable - “I only have to put up with this for a few years before getting enough hours to get a job with a better employer”.
Ryanair has claimed that it is modelled on the highly successful U.S. Low Cost Carrier Southwest Airlines. This claim has been successfully established in the minds of many external observers including most of the media and investor communities. Those with even a passing familiarity with the realities of life in the two airlines will know that the positive pro-employee disposition of Southwest management is completely different from the employee relations encountered in Ryanair.
Ryanair Pilot Employment Contracts – Some Issues
There appear to be two main types of employment contract, issued under either Irish or UK law. In general “permanent” pilots based in the U.K. have U.K. contracts of employment whilst those employed in Ireland and in all continental bases generally hold Irish contracts of employment. This latter arrangement facilitates Ryanair in a number of ways, including certain practices collectively termed “social dumping” (which refers to the avoidance of social payments in countries having higher employer social contribution rates). So called “contractor” or contract pilots with Ryanair are invariably employed by intermediaries, or external agencies. It is widely believed that some of these are managed by individuals having close contact with Ryanair.
Ryanair is unique in that the Terms and Conditions of employment enjoyed by pilots vary widely and that these Terms and Conditions can be changed, sometimes literally overnight, without any prior notice or discussion. Moreover, some of the contract clauses give considerable power to Ryanair to make changes that may have a radical impact on a pilot’s life. For example, the following appears in recent Ryanair contracts:
Ryanair are planning to open a number of new European Bases in the near future and it should be clearly understood that you may be required to transfer to that base and that this transfer will be without compensation.
You will be based initially at XXXX Airport; however the company has the right to transfer you, without compensation, to any of its base stations including a new European Base. It must be understood that should you be transferred to another base you will be paid in accordance with the prevailing salary and flight pay system at that base.
It is reported that some pilots have been permanently moved from base to base with remarkably little notice. It will be noted that this will be "without compensation" (and means that the pilot will find and pay for all hotel accommodation). In addition, the reference to being paid “in accordance with prevailing pay at that base" correctly suggests that a new contract will have to be signed, normally with reduced Terms and Conditions of employment. That contract might not be made available until after the move has been completed and will then be offered on a “take it or leave it” basis.
Ryanair Employee Representative Committees (ERCs)
In its various communications Ryanair places great emphasis on the role played by their “ERCs”. The airline claims that these entities are the primary means by which they engage in discussions and negotiations with their employees. However, most observers and Ryanair pilots view ERCs as tools of management. They certainly do not appear to be independent of management, nor do they appear to be run in accordance with the limited rules established by Ryanair for their functioning. For example, it is believed (in September 2005) that none of the Ryanair ERCs have representatives have been democratically elected. In practice most ERC pilot “representatives” are appointed and some even deny that they are members of the ERC when questioned by the very pilots Ryanair claim they represent.
In a judgment, issued in January 2005, the Labour Court in Dublin ruled that ERCs are not independent negotiating entities. The following is an extract from the published findings of the Labour Court:
“Having considered all of the information placed before it, the Court is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that whilst Ryanair communicates and consults with employees, including Pilots in relation to their pay and conditions of employment, it is not its practice to engage in collective bargaining negotiations as the Court understands that expression. The Court has also found that there are no operative internal dispute resolution procedures.”
Put bluntly, few believe that ERCs do other than provide a minimum “fig-leave cover” to enable Ryanair to dictate terms and conditions to their employees. ERC’s thus allow Ryanair to “dress up” Terms and Conditions as having been “negotiated”. They do not provide a means by which individual grievances can be address, nor do they allow pilots to address anomalies such as the wide range of pilot terms and conditions applying to pilots doing exactly the same job, the absence of rules relating to promotion and movement from base to base, as well as a host of other important issues.
Pilot Recruitment, Terms & Conditions and the Market
Some Ryanair pilots have experiences that are different to those described above. A further complication is that, in practice, the conditions of employment and treatment of Ryanair pilots varies with changes in market conditions. For example, pilots recruited when the airline could not train them quickly enough found that there was no question of payment for type ratings and so forth. On the other hand, some of these pilots have also had experience of Ryanair behaviour when it feels itself to be in a position of strength – such as in early 2004 when a radical reduction in working conditions was announced to pilots by memo.
Changes in the pilot market in early 2005 suggest that Ryanair is increasingly willing to be flexible. However, that does not mean that all offers of employment are improving. In fact, it is clear that for some applicants the contracts on offer are not particularly good, while for others are much better. The poorer offers are sometimes reported to be a consequence of the previous employment history of the pilot concerned. There is also an indication that motivational packages for Ryanair pilot managers are based on a continuing reduction in pilot costs (including salaries) and, if this is so, the future does not look very settled.
It has been reported to REPA that the Terms and Conditions discussed at the interview stage are often much better than those on offer when the initial contract is provided for signature. Some, but by no means all, of those who have rejected the proposed contract have had improved offers. There appears to be no pattern to how these choices are made. Shortfalls in pilot supply are addressed by “contractor pilots”, some of whom earn substantial sums on such short term contracts.
Historically, the evidence suggests that Ryanair will wait for a slowdown in business before acting to recover concessions on Terms and Conditions granted previously. In times of pilot surplus there is a general trend for Ryanair salaries and conditions to move downwards. This may reflect the Ryanair believe that there is always somebody willing to pay to enter airline employment (the “first job” motivation) and to be promoted at pay rates well below the market norm (the “first command” motivation).
In general Ryanair appears to use a range of employment “lock-in mechanisms” for their more junior pilots, or high time F/Os joining in hope of an early command - whether this is achieved via debts for a type rating, or different types of bond (line training, command upgrade, etc).
At times of pilot shortage Ryanair can be slow or argumentative about providing “guaranteed” leave and some pilots have reported difficulty in obtaining their entitlements. The effect of this can be to end up in a position where, having flown 900 hours and being unable to work any more, the outstanding leave is then granted.
Other Perspectives on Ryanair
In a recent post on PPRuNe an apologist for Ryanair said the following about the company
"Cause grief - and we'll do everything we can to make life so unbearable, you'll leave...". The tone of this post suggests that the author was proud of this state of affairs. The basic messages seem to be “If you are one of us, don’t worry” but “If you are not one of us, don’t bother applying”.
Readers can use the following links to build up a picture of the Ryanair corporate style. That style could be summed up as follows: “We aggressively deliver low fares to the vast majority of our customers and we are unapologetic about either the methods we use or any “casualties” that might occur en route. We don’t do apologies nor do we concede to error. If you don’t like this don’t travel, or work, with us.”
Ryan-be fair –
http://www.ryan-be-fair.org/
Ryan campaign -
http://www.ryanair.org.uk/
PPRuNe -
http://www.pprune.org/
Additional information can be found on the REPA site:
http://www.repaweb.org
Ryanair and the Courts / Politicians
From time to time Ryanair has found itself in dispute with many people, whether customers, staff, suppliers or politicians. Many of those who have been involved in such disputes have not been happy with their treatment. For example in the Irish Times the Irish Taoiseach, Mr. Bertie Ahearn, was quoted as stating that Michael O’Leary “would be up for bullying” if he was “still in the education stream”. The Taoiseach is further quoted as saying that “… there is one person he won’t bully, and that’s me”.
In the famous court case involving the one millionth Ryanair passenger (who was the plaintive referred to in the following quotation) the judge had this to say in his judgment:
“I found the plaintive a more persuasive witness than Mr. O’Leary and I therefore find as a fact that the version of events given by the plaintive is correct. … I reject Mr. O’Leary’s assertion that he was not hostile or aggressive or bullying toward the plaintiff. I find that he was.”
(Note: the plaintiff won her case and was awarded costs).
Surveys of Ryanair pilots - Findings
In recent years several surveys have been conducted by IALPA, BALPA and also on the REPA website itself. In summary, the difficult and sometimes unpleasant employment climate in Ryanair has been repeatedly identified in these surveys. The belief that Ryanair will strongly resist any effort to organise pilots is widespread, as is the desire of survey respondents to achieve an effective collective representation. However, many pilots fear being associated with the effort to organise.
The words “bullying” and “intimidation” have been used frequently in survey responses, pilot interviews and in other feedback from Ryanair pilots.
Note: it should not, however, be inferred that intimidation is seen by all pilots to be the same at all bases, or to be a permanent fixture. There are pilots who have had no such experiences, but those employed for longer periods are more likely to believe that it is “a problem”. It is also clear, for example, that bases with a strong “Base Captain” can be harmonious workplaces (at least until particular actions are imposed from outside).
REPA Survey on Pilot Priorities
In a survey conducted on the REPA site shortly after its inception REPA members were asked to rank, in order of importance, those items which they felt were most important for all Ryanair pilots to address. Responses to three particular questions (out of 11) received two thirds of the total votes and the replies identified the following as the most important issues facing Ryanair pilots:
1. A representative body, chosen by Ryanair pilots themselves.
2. Common Contracts of Employment.
3. A Seniority List.
4. Arrangements for Pilot Pensions
Notes:
(1) the full survey used a “weighted” voting system;
(2) the inclusion of pilot pensions as item four above is based on combining responses to two questions on pension arrangements.
Only one of the 11 questions received no votes at all. This question asked if “a functioning ERC [ Employee Representative Committee ] at each Ryanair base” is desired by Ryanair pilots.
REPA Survey on Annual Leave
Another REPA survey addressed the issue of Annual Leave for Ryanair pilots. The following responses are among those reported at the time of writing.
1. To a question about how easy it is to obtain their Leave the responses were:
I have always been able to book all of my leave - 6% of pilots agreed
I have normally been able to book all of my leave - 16% of pilots agreed
I have had occasional difficulty in booking my leave - 24% of pilots agreed
I have regularly had difficulty in booking my leave - 55% of pilots agreed
2. The following are responses to other questions regarding Leave:
I believe that the Ryanair system for allocating leave is unfair -14% of pilots agreed
I have been unable to obtain leave even after reaching 800-900 hours flight time in a year – no pilots agreed
I have had difficulty in my dealings with Ryanair personnel in respect of obtaining leave (inflexible, uninterested, unhelpful, aggressive, offensive, uncaring, etc.) - 70% of pilots agreed
None of the above accurately describes my experience of Ryanair - 17% of pilots agreed
Note:
This survey cannot be considered to have sufficient answers to be a completely reliable guide since the numbers voting (at the time of writing) was less than 10% of the Ryanair pilot population. That point having been made, the survey does confirm information frequently reported to REPA by Ryanair pilots.
Legal and other Actions by Pilots Against Ryanair
Pilots in Dublin, some of whom are amongst the longest serving pilots in the airline, approached the Irish Labour Court in November 2004 with a view to resolving a number of issues relating to their employment that had given rise to concern.
In October 2005 IALPA has a large number of claims and legal actions outstanding. Some of these involve claims of workplace victimisation which followed the initial approach to the Labour Court. Among these cases are the following:
1. A claim before the Labour Court regarding Terms and Conditions of employment.
2. Approximately 250 “victimisation in the workplace” claims lodged or due to the lodged with the Labour Relations Commission.
3. An outstanding High Court Writ against Ryanair signed by approximately 60 pilots.
The fact that these matters cannot be resolved in dialogue with Ryanair, which has exercised their Constitutional right to utilise all possible legal avenues to challenge each stage of the proceedings, ensures that rapid progress cannot be achieved. At the time of writing (October 2005) IALPA has successfully won a significant engagement in the Irish Labour Court as well as two High Court cases.
Similarly, individual pilots who have taken legal action against Ryanair have invariably been successful. However, it must be stated that such success requires determination and a willingness to absorb the stresses and pressures associated with escalating legal costs, time delays, and so forth.
In Summary – Employment by Ryanair as a pilot
Good points: prospect of early promotion for F/O’s, hard work, quick accrual of experience/hours, good pay, generally stable rosters, no night stops, leave arrangements maximising the combined value of leave and days off, rapid career advancement possible when events move satisfactorily, etc. Apart from its administration, the general consensus is that pilot training in Ryanair is practical, effective and pilot oriented.
Bad points: widespread perception that “speaking up” is dangerous to one’s best interest, long working days, lack of any independent representation for pilot interests, arbitrary changes to working terms and conditions, deductions from pay (both monthly and at the end of employment), feeling that to stand up for contractual entitlements is to run unacceptable risks (with consequences such as being moved to an undesired base, difficulties in obtaining leave entitlements, or risking future advancement). In addition, none of the essential elements for making a career are in place, notably pensions and other benefits.