Caudillo -
To argue the closure of EMA with reference to crew costs would be disingenuous and dishonest.
Indeed so - and that is not my argument. Crew costs are one factor of many that have led to this decision. It is not the salary levels that are the problem - it is the crew utilisation. I have some sympathy with our management concerns over this issue. We cannot ignore that issue but nor should we blame the situation on crew costs in entirety. I have learnt that in the light of easyJet's decision BMI Baby may be emboldened to increase their aircraft establishment. Jet 2 obviously feel a degree of confidence too, and Ryanair are positively delighted at the situation. What that means is that it is possible for aggressive low-cost carriers to make money at EMA - we appear to no longer fit that category. Clearly if we could make reasonable profits there we would still be there - the people who make these decisions are not madmen and simply react to market realities. My difficulty with the situation is that I believe that profit is possible there and we need to ensure that we are not driven completely out the regions. Nonetheless, the facts remain that at the moment there are significantly greater yields available in continental Europe than is the case at EMA - that will prove a very hard argument to overcome in the forthcoming discussions.