Not a single colleague was disadvantaged by it and it had to be done to sort out the mess.
Not in 2010, but perhaps in the near future if they start to introduce bases built on a flexible roster contract?
You've said that you only have a few more year till retirement, but what about the 20-30 year old colleagues who still have to work a few more decades? Did you ever consider the long term consequences of your short term gains/actions for their sake? Perhaps you're happy in LGW, but perhaps there are hundreds of colleagues who one day hope for a (for example) ATH base. Or what about the starter of this thread, who paid his dues and perhaps one day hopes to join on a fixed roster? Would you still be able to look into a mirror and say "not a single colleague was disadvantaged by it" if one day they offer a take-it-or-leave-it '
flexible roster only' contract for a popular new base or existing bases for new-joiners?
Had we followed your advice to somehow punish the company, we would have done incalculable damage to easyJet and, by association, ourselves.
So the company has you over a barrel? No matter how badly
they f*ck things up, good 'ol Norman is there to bail them out? It's your job to drive the plane Norman, not to permanently cover for someone's planning blunders.
All people like you did this summer is to help the company paper over the ugly side (short term) and help them insert the thin end of the wedge (long term) with regards to the fixed roster pattern.
