EssexBoy, I would like to reply (and in no way criticize) your comment.
This is not a win. Nothing has been gained by the Pilot group. All we have done is fend of an attack by the “Management”.
I think your comment has a lot of validity and I respect your opinion completly. But I would like to point out that there is more to this, in my opinion, than meets the eye.
The Dublin pilots are taking the company to court because they believe they were "bullied" into new terms and conditions which were not as agreed in their employment contract (which will be different to your contract if you joined in this decade). As you pointed out this case was taken as a "side issue" by the company. This case can be viewed as a either an attempt by the company to prevent pilot association members from "bullying" colleagues OR an attemot to slow down and hamper the progress of the action taken by the pilots against the company. Whichever view you take on this is actually irrelevent.
The fact which is important to the OVERALL issue is that a judge has made clear and unambiguous statements which now become facts by virtue of them appearing in a judgement.
He has made statement (or indeed JUDGEMENTS) on the company's approach to resolving the conflict, the companies handling of the Goss case and the companies reliability as witnesses.
These statements can be presented as fact in the main case. As such it has now become, as a direct result of this judgement, very likely that the Dublin pilots will win their main case against the company.
This result of a win in the main case will open the doors for the rest of FR pilots to take an action against the company if they feel their terms and conditions have been erroded illegally and with the aid of "bullying" tactics.
This wipes out all the savings from : uniform/tea/coffee/hotels/ids and much more in one go. Nice work boys
So, in fact, it could be argued that the case may well result in the reinstatement of uniform/tea/coffee/hotels/ids.
I do not which to take what you said out of context so I should not ignore that you were actually talking about profit rather than the benefits. It is debateable as to who actually initiated the losses. IE should the pilots have not taken an action because it would be expensive even though they felt unfairly treated OR did the company incur these costs through mistreatment of staff.
Just points for you to ponder. Not meant to be critcal of you (just argumentative) because I think you made very valid points