PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Ryanair 5/4 Roster & 5% Pay Deal?
View Single Post
Old 6th Mar 2006, 12:58
  #17 (permalink)  
Fairfax
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Where is the reasoning in all this? The company (any company for that matter) wishes to operate its program at the least cost, ie efficiency.

Efficiency is work out over work in, or putting it in context from the company's viewpoint, hours flown over pilot's pay. Well, for the moment at least those two items are a 'given'; we are going to do 900 hrs for sure at what ever we get paid.
So what else is there to consider? The answer, I suggest is - availability.

The company would prefer we were available to fly 365 days a year. Clearly that is a fantasy, but if that were the case then 900/365 = 2.47 hours a day. We don't operate like that. We do on average, I reckon, days of about 5 hours or so; sometimes alot longer and occasionally a little shorter.

5/4 is a 9 day pattern. 365/9 = 40.55 patterns a year. If you take away 3 patterns (not enough by any way you work it out) for Leave that leaves 37.55 patterns. 37.55 x 5 = 187 days available for work. 900/187 = 4.81 hours each flying/work day.

You begin to see where DOB is coming from. He gets the flexibility of 187 days availability to extract the 900 hours. We get to be exhausted and fatigued. Does he care?

Lets try 4 On, 4 Off (4/4), an 8 day pattern. 365/8 = 45.62 patterns.
Take away 7 patterns for 28 days Leave = 38.62 patterns a year.
38.62 x 4 = 154.5 working days a year. (Thats more like it and absolutely reasonable).
So, 900/154.5 = 5.83 hours per working day.
The flexibilty remains, given the number of days we do of well over 7 or even 8 or 9 hours. And given that flexibilty, the extra availabilty is simply not required; just as - see above - 365 days availabilty is superfluous.

Getting back (at last) to the original point:- where is the reasoning? Is it simply an exercise in ramming home who is in control? Why - is there any doubt? Perhaps it's an example of unnecessary malevolence. Why?

I hope I am not lecturing anyone, and I am certainly not an apologist for the company. I do feel that, despite we know what this company can be like, we must argue our case and make them listen to us. It is usually always too early to shout insults, much as we would like to. If they don't listen to reason then make sure everyone knows it.
Fairfax is offline