The truth about the Air Lingus dispute
Forgive me for reproducing this from the union website - but this dispute will have a massive impact on all pilots and I think everyone who reads Pprune needs to be lucid, informed and clued -up about this .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
IMPACT trade union
Aer Lingus Pilots’ Dispute
Background Information
29th May 2002
Pilots HAVE signed up to the ‘Survival Plan’
The company says pilots have refused to make sacrifices to ensure the company’s survival. They have not:
Pay
Pilots have accepted a two-year pay freeze in line with the ‘Survival Plan’, including a freeze on PPF increases and a freeze on incremental increases.
And, by agreeing to the postponement of an independent pay review last year, they have already saved the company over €12 million over and above the considerable contribution made by other staff. The annual saving from this sacrifice is around €20 million.
Pilots are the only staff group that did not strike in pursuit of a pay claim last year – and the only group not to have received a pay increase over and above the PPF terms in 2001.
Staffing
Pilots have accepted reduced staffing.
44 pilot trainees were dismissed, many within weeks of qualification.
52 pilots have availed of unpaid leave so far.
Pilots have accepted proposals for early retirement.
Thirteen have already taken this up and the Phil Flynn proposals allow for a total of 27.
A further 20 pilots are due to retire in September 2002.
The company has now accepted that the Flynn recommendation on staff numbers now resolves the issue of pilot numbers.
More change?
IMPACT has told Aer Lingus that it is available for talks on other changes to working practices.
The union made itself available for talks immediately after pilots voted by 99 per cent to reject the ‘Russell’ package.
The union said some of the Russell proposals could be acceptable to pilots – but the company refuses to explore this.
Pilots have conceded the vast majority of change sought under the ‘Survival Plan’ Now the company is closing the airline and risking its survival over unacceptable changes to working practices that are not necessary to ensure future viability. They are quibbling over the last 100 metres of a successfully-run marathon.
Pilots are not jeopardising the company’s survival
The company says pilots are jeopardising the airline's future. They are not:
The pilots’ strike was only triggered after pilots were suspended without pay for adhering to their existing agreed conditions (NB, pilot contracts state that their working conditions are those agreed between the union and the company).
Since then the company has refused to discuss the issue with pilots or their union.
The company is now threatening a lockout, which will indeed jeopardise the company’s future and everybody’s jobs.
Management seems determined on confrontation instead of negotiation.
Aer Lingus management IS jeopardising the company’s future
Management’s decision to close the airline from Friday is not based on operational or industrial relations factors:
Aer Lingus says it cannot run services on Friday 31st May because of the strike on Thursday. But when cabin crew took one-day strike action last year normal, or near-normal services resumed the following day. And aircraft cannot legally fly without cabin crew any more than they can without pilots.
Aer Lingus says the threat of further industrial action means they cannot guarantee services on Friday But they know there can be no industrial action on Friday 31st May because, by law, seven day’s notice must be served before further industrial action can legally be taken. IMPACT has not served further strike notice
In reality, management have recklessly decided to inconvenience passengers, risk jobs, and jeopardise the airline’s future in pursuit of unnecessary confrontation with pilots.
The proposed changes are not necessary to secure survival
The company says all the proposed changes to pilots’ working practices are necessary to the company’s survival. They are not:
The company is proposing very basic terms of employment, including flight rosters based on legal minimum standards alone.
The company has often insisted that changes were necessary and then relented when unions proved them wrong. The u-turns on contracting out and compulsory redundancies are examples.
All Aer Lingus staff groups have secured modifications to the original ‘Survival Plan’ and none has had any working condition changes imposed.
Pilots have said they are prepared to talk about necessary changes – but won’t accept draconian measures that are unacceptable and unnecessary to the company’s survival.
The Labour Relations Commission proposals are not binding
The company says the Labour Relations Commission report on work practices is binding. It is not:
The LRC report does not say it is binding.
In the LRC talks, the management and union sides both said the report could not be binding.
Aer Lingus wrote to the LRC saying that it accepted the proposals, which would not have been necessary if there was no option but to accept.
Aer Lingus has rejected many third party and arbitration findings in the past.
Conclusion
Pilots are determined to secure the airline’s future. But like other groups of staff, they are not prepared to accept draconian measures that are not needed to secure the ongoing survival and success of Aer Lingus. Neither will they accept summary suspensions without pay or the imposition of changes to existing agreements without agreement. No group of airline staff has done, or would do, that.
This week’s strike and lock out can still be avoided if:
Suspended pilots are reinstated and reimbursed for lost pay.
The threat of further suspensions is lifted.
No changes in working practices are imposed
The company discusses proposed changes with pilots’ representatives and makes any necessary changes to working conditions by agreement – as has been the case with all other Aer Lingus staff.