Ryanair - 6
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While undoubtedly at the higher end of the scale, 1 job per 1000 passengers, whether direct or indirect, is as good an estimation as any really. Approximately 15% of Ryanair's current weekly schedule is affected by this ruling with one weeks notice - I stupidly thought even the Ryanair bashers might acknowledge that it's the court that's being the most unreasonable of the two here.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Based
While undoubtedly at the higher end of the scale, 1 job per 1000 passengers, whether direct or indirect, is as good an estimation as any really.
I'd suggest there are two sorts of jobs created by air services: the direct ones (check-in staff, airport handlers, etc.), and the indirect ones (companies being able to win more international business because they can reach their customers more easily, so they hire more staff; or jobs in tourism thanks to an increase in the number of tourists).
It should be pretty obvious that a new route opening up an underdeveloped tourist area, or dramatically improving business connectivity, will have a different employment impact to a "more of the same" service in competition with existing routes.
It's not as though NRW is an area underserved with transport links, and I suspect most of the passengers are originating from NRN rather than inbound to the area, so the Ryanair network there is unlikely to be contributing much indirectly to the local economy. Indeed, if it's facilitating local people travelling abroad (which of course they have every right to do
) you could argue that it's helping to take money out of the local economy. But that's globalisation and the single market. Bottom line: I give as much credence to Ryanair's one-size-fits-all jobs/passengers exchange rate as I do to the official Zimbabwe dollar exchange rate...
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a 'as good as any' because there's no exact science in calculating these figures. Here's a link to an estimation by a number of aviation sources across Europe: http://www.eraa.org/intranet/documen...5fastfacts.pdf
They estimate 4,000 jobs per 1 million passengers which actually makes Ryanair's 2,500 for 2.5 million passengers look like an under-estimation! I'm not really sure why you're bringing currency exchange rates into this.
They estimate 4,000 jobs per 1 million passengers which actually makes Ryanair's 2,500 for 2.5 million passengers look like an under-estimation! I'm not really sure why you're bringing currency exchange rates into this.
Based - interesting to read, but have these numbers by validated by any independent organisations ?
I suspect the European Regions Airline Asociation whose mission statement is:
ERA is, and will remain, the principal body that represents the interests of organisations involved in intra-European air transport by:
I suspect the European Regions Airline Asociation whose mission statement is:
ERA is, and will remain, the principal body that represents the interests of organisations involved in intra-European air transport by:
- Influencing regulatory and environmental conditions
- Facilitating technical cooperation and advancement, and;
- Gaining public and political support
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
davidjohnson6, I don't know the background to the research but no, these numbers won't have been validated by an independent organisation as it wouldn't be feasible to do so. It would only be possible to validate their estimation techniques which I assume, although don't know, forms part of the observer role which included the European Commission.
I don't see why you call it a strong conflict of interest, yes clearly it's in the European Regions Airline Association interest to highlight the maximum number of jobs that they believe is created by aviation, however they will only achieve any recognition of their claims through the use of acceptable and adequate research techniques. Given the organisations willingly putting their names to this and the fact that the European Commission acted as observers, again I can only assume that there is solid basis for their claims.
I don't see why you call it a strong conflict of interest, yes clearly it's in the European Regions Airline Association interest to highlight the maximum number of jobs that they believe is created by aviation, however they will only achieve any recognition of their claims through the use of acceptable and adequate research techniques. Given the organisations willingly putting their names to this and the fact that the European Commission acted as observers, again I can only assume that there is solid basis for their claims.
This might be getting into thread drift - mods please advise if you think this should be a separate thread.
Given the high profile that commercial aviation has in Europe, I would have expected the EU, national Govt, or at the very least someone in a university to have wanted to do and publish some sort of research into how adding flights to regional airports would affect local employment. At the very least, academics in universities are always looking for something new to publish. It just becomes a matter of trawling through various journals and EU reports to find the relevant data - which is exactly the kind of thing the ERAA should know about when it comes to lobbying policymakers in Govt as it becomes much easier to convince ministers that way. Think how good it would look for MOL if he could back up his claims on job creation from a neutral body whenever the EU investigates Govt-owned airports paying FR substantial marketing fees - just claim it as a valid job creation measure ! I note the ERAA have not in this case referred to data from a neutral source.
The 2-page document from the ERAA reads and looks like a PR document, saying only how wonderful the aviation industry is. The golden rule in PR is never to lie, but one can always be selective in what is discussed. Thus in stating a 'jobs created' figure, one could choose a set of assumptions under which the job creation figure looks best. Furthermore, if you worked for the ERAA and knew that your salary ultimately was paid by regional airlines and airports - it would seem a bad career move to publish something negative about aviation.
A while ago, an Irish airport (Dublin ?) refused to subsidise a Ryanair route to Morocco (Marrakech ?). FR responded by saying how many *Irish* tourism jobs would be lost. I've seen a lot of tourists from north Europe in Morocco, but I haven't seen many Moroccan tourists in north Europe.
Yes, aviation does create jobs, but I think the ERAA and FR are both overstating the job creation rate.
Given the high profile that commercial aviation has in Europe, I would have expected the EU, national Govt, or at the very least someone in a university to have wanted to do and publish some sort of research into how adding flights to regional airports would affect local employment. At the very least, academics in universities are always looking for something new to publish. It just becomes a matter of trawling through various journals and EU reports to find the relevant data - which is exactly the kind of thing the ERAA should know about when it comes to lobbying policymakers in Govt as it becomes much easier to convince ministers that way. Think how good it would look for MOL if he could back up his claims on job creation from a neutral body whenever the EU investigates Govt-owned airports paying FR substantial marketing fees - just claim it as a valid job creation measure ! I note the ERAA have not in this case referred to data from a neutral source.
The 2-page document from the ERAA reads and looks like a PR document, saying only how wonderful the aviation industry is. The golden rule in PR is never to lie, but one can always be selective in what is discussed. Thus in stating a 'jobs created' figure, one could choose a set of assumptions under which the job creation figure looks best. Furthermore, if you worked for the ERAA and knew that your salary ultimately was paid by regional airlines and airports - it would seem a bad career move to publish something negative about aviation.
A while ago, an Irish airport (Dublin ?) refused to subsidise a Ryanair route to Morocco (Marrakech ?). FR responded by saying how many *Irish* tourism jobs would be lost. I've seen a lot of tourists from north Europe in Morocco, but I haven't seen many Moroccan tourists in north Europe.
Yes, aviation does create jobs, but I think the ERAA and FR are both overstating the job creation rate.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thus in stating a 'jobs created' figure, one could choose a set of assumptions under which the job creation figure looks best
Think how good it would look for MOL if he could back up his claims on job creation from a neutral body whenever the EU investigates Govt-owned airports paying FR substantial marketing fees - just claim it as a valid job creation measure !
To get back on topic my only reason for linking to the ERAA document was to point out that Ryanair's estimation of job losses is not completely off the wall and is as valid as any. Some may feel it's overstated, the ERAA may feel the opposite but it's not something that's likely ever to be validated with real data. To get back even further on topic, jobs (exactly how many, who knows!) are at threat here due to a court decision to restrict the hours of operation at Weeze airport at one weeks notice, now that is off the wall!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 2 DME
Age: 54
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Research carried out for the 2002 White Paper on future air transport development in the UK noted that a ratio of 1,000 employees per 1 million passengers was a commonly used 'rule of thumb'. The DoT funded detailed research by ECOTEC and Oxford Economic Forecasting (OEF) which suggested that whilst circumstances differ for individual airports as a broad measure it's reasonable to use. Things tend to get harder to evaluate as you move away from direct impacts of aviation.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Top Bunk
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See the Oaf put his foot in his mouth again....
"Swine Flu only affects slumdwellers, a few Strepsils will sort it out"
Source: RTE Morning Ireland ('it says in the papers') 29/4/09
Will this be the excuse for the next set of dreadful figures I wonder?
"Swine Flu only affects slumdwellers, a few Strepsils will sort it out"
Source: RTE Morning Ireland ('it says in the papers') 29/4/09
Will this be the excuse for the next set of dreadful figures I wonder?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Delft
Age: 39
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanair has announced there will be no decision before friday.
In german: Ryanair: Keine Entscheidung vor Freitag
In german: Ryanair: Keine Entscheidung vor Freitag
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
166 passengers on board a Ryanair plane were grounded in Dublin earlier...
Four school teens on the flight - from Nantes in France - had to be assesed after falling ill - it's believed they may have had food poisoning.
Ryanair's Stephen McNamara reckons the Dublin Airport Authority overreacted:
Source: Dublins 98 News
Four school teens on the flight - from Nantes in France - had to be assesed after falling ill - it's believed they may have had food poisoning.
Ryanair's Stephen McNamara reckons the Dublin Airport Authority overreacted:
Source: Dublins 98 News
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Italy
Age: 36
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New routes from Spain
From Alicante to:
Bologna, Fez, Gdanks, Lille, Marrakesh, Santander
From Madrid to:
Almeria, Bologna, Granada, London Gatwick, Malta
Any news from Dusseldorf Weeze????
From Alicante to:
Bologna, Fez, Gdanks, Lille, Marrakesh, Santander
From Madrid to:
Almeria, Bologna, Granada, London Gatwick, Malta
Any news from Dusseldorf Weeze????