Aer Lingus - 5
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 43
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it already on-site, have all the equipment already on-site this would add very little cost and quite profitable,
This is not a criticism of the Aer Lingus staff, just a point about how cut throat ground handling has become.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ireland nowadays
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Brian's point is that there would be no employment costs because the employees are already there.
Aer Lingus have a huge number of departures from Dublin before 7:30am, but after that things get a bit quieter, with only a few arrivals (places where they overnight like Heathrow or very short hops like Manchester where the return takes next to no time) coming in before 9:00am. But because of the shift patterns, they have baggage handlers employed there anyway.
Personally, I don't know enough about the baggage handling side of the industry to know whether they have other duties to perform at this time.
One thing I do know is that acountants would insist on assigning costs to it in a way that made it look less profitable, even though it would increase profits elsewhere in the business.
Whether it's doable, I don't know. If you look at the airlines coming in then (Aer Arann, Flybe, Air France, BMI), they have operations throughout the day and Aer Lingus couldn't just tender for the bits at those hours. There are a few US-based transatlantic carriers (American, Delta) who arrive then as well.
Aer Lingus have a huge number of departures from Dublin before 7:30am, but after that things get a bit quieter, with only a few arrivals (places where they overnight like Heathrow or very short hops like Manchester where the return takes next to no time) coming in before 9:00am. But because of the shift patterns, they have baggage handlers employed there anyway.
Personally, I don't know enough about the baggage handling side of the industry to know whether they have other duties to perform at this time.
One thing I do know is that acountants would insist on assigning costs to it in a way that made it look less profitable, even though it would increase profits elsewhere in the business.
Whether it's doable, I don't know. If you look at the airlines coming in then (Aer Arann, Flybe, Air France, BMI), they have operations throughout the day and Aer Lingus couldn't just tender for the bits at those hours. There are a few US-based transatlantic carriers (American, Delta) who arrive then as well.
Sorry Brian
Nice idea but no chance in hell of it even being considered much less happening..
Does anybody think the Unions care ?
They wouldn't even consider taking on extra work without wanting huge "disturbance allowances" and "additional payments" before even deigning to consider this.
If Airline goes down the tubes it is Managements fault and nothing to do with overmanning, outdated working practices and inflexibility on their part. They would still demand maximum redundancy payments even at the cost of Airline ceasing to exist.
Nice idea but no chance in hell of it even being considered much less happening..
Does anybody think the Unions care ?
They wouldn't even consider taking on extra work without wanting huge "disturbance allowances" and "additional payments" before even deigning to consider this.
If Airline goes down the tubes it is Managements fault and nothing to do with overmanning, outdated working practices and inflexibility on their part. They would still demand maximum redundancy payments even at the cost of Airline ceasing to exist.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ireland nowadays
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder whether the unions would take that attitude; it wouldn't be new work.
I can remember when Aer Lingus used to handle for Aer Arann, Air Wales and a few charter operators in Cork. AFAIR it was Willie Walsh who put an end to handling other airlines.
So, it would seem there would be precedent and the unions couldn't view it as a change of contract.
I can remember when Aer Lingus used to handle for Aer Arann, Air Wales and a few charter operators in Cork. AFAIR it was Willie Walsh who put an end to handling other airlines.
So, it would seem there would be precedent and the unions couldn't view it as a change of contract.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-Outsource all ground ops in ORK and SNN
-Close SNN base and keep seasonal or reduced JFK/BOS ex SNN, operated by DUB based crew
-Outsource cleaning/catering in DUB
Those 3 combined would save EI a lot, and make them a lot stronger during the down turn. It would also make it a lot easier to seek a strategic partner
-Close SNN base and keep seasonal or reduced JFK/BOS ex SNN, operated by DUB based crew
-Outsource cleaning/catering in DUB
Those 3 combined would save EI a lot, and make them a lot stronger during the down turn. It would also make it a lot easier to seek a strategic partner
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ireland
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-Outsource all ground ops in ORK and SNN
-Close SNN base and keep seasonal or reduced JFK/BOS ex SNN, operated by DUB based crew
-Outsource cleaning/catering in DUB
Those 3 combined would save EI a lot, and make them a lot stronger during the down turn. It would also make it a lot easier to seek a strategic partner
-Close SNN base and keep seasonal or reduced JFK/BOS ex SNN, operated by DUB based crew
-Outsource cleaning/catering in DUB
Those 3 combined would save EI a lot, and make them a lot stronger during the down turn. It would also make it a lot easier to seek a strategic partner
Why do you straight away think that SNN is the weak link in the tranatlantic operation. When open skies came along EI jumped into opening 5 new routes and to my knowledge these are the routes in most trouble. Give SNN a break. Your cost saving measures will save money but will also reduce revenue and if passengers wernt flying form SNN EI wouldnt be there in the first place.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If SNN t/a operations make money, they can be flown ex DUB by DUB crew.
I think outsourcing in DUB base ground staff would be a stupid move. At least hold to a EI staff for ticket desk etc, and keep some amount of EI presence on the ground.
There is no need for catering and cleaning. They can be done a lot more cost effectively by the likes of Gate Gourmet or Alpha. As they wont be EI staff, higher standards can be enforced without the threat of the unions. Catering could be improved on long-haul, and would probably still be cheaper as the staff wont be on EI contracts. In times like these, where airlines are cutting back, i'm sure cleaning and catering companies would fight tooth and nail to get a contract with EI in DUB, which would save EI even more money.
SNN & ORK ground staff cover a few EI flights a day, so they can be easily outsourced to Servisair etc.
SNN cabin crew base flies BOS and JFK, which can be flown by DUB based crew.
Times are tough, and its time to face up to facts. I dont see pay cuts making much of a difference in lowering costs, and EI will still be lumbered with over-staffing, and a base they dont want. If BA, AF or LH are to invest in EI, the company needs to cut back, and cleaning, catering and SNN are the easiest targets.
I think outsourcing in DUB base ground staff would be a stupid move. At least hold to a EI staff for ticket desk etc, and keep some amount of EI presence on the ground.
There is no need for catering and cleaning. They can be done a lot more cost effectively by the likes of Gate Gourmet or Alpha. As they wont be EI staff, higher standards can be enforced without the threat of the unions. Catering could be improved on long-haul, and would probably still be cheaper as the staff wont be on EI contracts. In times like these, where airlines are cutting back, i'm sure cleaning and catering companies would fight tooth and nail to get a contract with EI in DUB, which would save EI even more money.
SNN & ORK ground staff cover a few EI flights a day, so they can be easily outsourced to Servisair etc.
SNN cabin crew base flies BOS and JFK, which can be flown by DUB based crew.
Times are tough, and its time to face up to facts. I dont see pay cuts making much of a difference in lowering costs, and EI will still be lumbered with over-staffing, and a base they dont want. If BA, AF or LH are to invest in EI, the company needs to cut back, and cleaning, catering and SNN are the easiest targets.
Worrying but interesting reading: Aer Lingus may soon be running on empty - Irish, Business - Independent.ie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Leeds, UK & Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My only point was that ground handling would grow revenue and add cash to the bottom line without costing EI very much at all as all the staff, equipment and so on are already there and being amortized against the EI flights anyway.
Funny that EI "need" to outsource with FR at DUB. You do realise that FR self-handle at DUB, don't you? SNN I agree with, however and I think self-handling three flights each morning and one in the afternoon (LHR) must look quite costly.
As for SNN cabin crew, perhaps is they were to merge it would make more sense for them to be merged into the ORK base, as it is geographically closer. Still a commute from SNN or Limerick is not ideal for anybody... Operationally it would be easier to merge them into the DUB base.
The EI rumor mill suggests that 300 cabin crew and 50-60 ground jobs may be lost. SNN would be an easy target, as others here have said.
Brian.
Funny that EI "need" to outsource with FR at DUB. You do realise that FR self-handle at DUB, don't you? SNN I agree with, however and I think self-handling three flights each morning and one in the afternoon (LHR) must look quite costly.
As for SNN cabin crew, perhaps is they were to merge it would make more sense for them to be merged into the ORK base, as it is geographically closer. Still a commute from SNN or Limerick is not ideal for anybody... Operationally it would be easier to merge them into the DUB base.
The EI rumor mill suggests that 300 cabin crew and 50-60 ground jobs may be lost. SNN would be an easy target, as others here have said.
Brian.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Leeds, UK & Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EI-RB
I 100% agree with you on LGW - it's wayy too early to be closing the base, it only opened a month ago. I wonder if this 'analyst' was one who said the good times would roll forever??? As for BFS,I think it needs another 12 months before it's future can be determined....
Also, I think it is inevitable that EI will eventually be part of Lufthansa, BA or AF. BA, most likely as LH and AF already have a decent presence in the DUB region through bmi, SAS & LH Mainline and CityJet respectively. BA would overnight loose 10% of their revenue if EI deflected to feeding AF or LH group hubs. EI is just too small, too peripheral to survive on it's own. Had Mannion allowed merger discussions, counter attacking the FR fiasco instead of stubbornly launching BFS and failing miserably in Dubai EI might be looking much healthier at the minute.
Brian.
I 100% agree with you on LGW - it's wayy too early to be closing the base, it only opened a month ago. I wonder if this 'analyst' was one who said the good times would roll forever??? As for BFS,I think it needs another 12 months before it's future can be determined....
Also, I think it is inevitable that EI will eventually be part of Lufthansa, BA or AF. BA, most likely as LH and AF already have a decent presence in the DUB region through bmi, SAS & LH Mainline and CityJet respectively. BA would overnight loose 10% of their revenue if EI deflected to feeding AF or LH group hubs. EI is just too small, too peripheral to survive on it's own. Had Mannion allowed merger discussions, counter attacking the FR fiasco instead of stubbornly launching BFS and failing miserably in Dubai EI might be looking much healthier at the minute.
Brian.
The EI rumor mill suggests that 300 cabin crew and 50-60 ground jobs may be lost. SNN would be an easy target, as others here have said.
Problem is that unless EI takes a hard line and indicates Statutory Redundancy then they burn through lots of cash for everyone they make redundant.
Unions will strike and bleed them dry unless they get what they want in redundancy.
Doubt EI have the Nuts to do anything like this.
Knee jerk reactions like BFS and LGW really show the board lost its way a long time ago.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2,782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EI-RB
I agree with alot of what you said and competing with Easyjet but I would add, Belfast is a small market, in many of the markets that Aer Lingus went onto eg Geneva, Nice, Amsterdam, Paris, London etc, there was gross over capacity, and while Aer Lingus had awful loads on some of the routes, easyjet have been suffering too.
The Aer Lingus brand is well know in NI, many of the locals here have often went to Dublin to use Aer Lingus on routes that are not available from here.
Aer Lingus you said need to offer something better and better customer service, as someone who uses both of the carriers I think that the Aer Lingus product is better. Better planes, better experience, ie pre select seats. However, have to say Easyjet staff particularly the BFS base crew are very tuned into the customers needs and are totally aware that passengers have a choice in many markets and they do go the extra mile. This costs nothing to the airlines.
In Gatwick , the market is huge, If Aer Lingus can attract the customer once they will come back, and at best it is very early days. Aer Lingus need a smaller aircraft in Belfast in my view. Developing new markets such as Munich, Milan etc a 172 seater is too big.
Aer Lingus have made the big mistake of bowing down to Easyjet at Belfast by axing many of the main routes eg Amsterdam. Easyjet have nothing to be afraid of in LGW as they know that Aer Lingus will stick it out for so long until easyjet beat them down and then they will pull out.
In summary, what I am saying is that I dont believe that the same experience may be replicated at LGW as London is a huge market. However, as it is LGW, easyjet will probably follow them onto any new route that they open.. except Knock of course :-)
What about LGW to city of Derry, this has to be a great opportunity, Ryanair have cut back Stansted, and LGW is the better gateway.. what does anyone else think?
EI-BUD
I agree with alot of what you said and competing with Easyjet but I would add, Belfast is a small market, in many of the markets that Aer Lingus went onto eg Geneva, Nice, Amsterdam, Paris, London etc, there was gross over capacity, and while Aer Lingus had awful loads on some of the routes, easyjet have been suffering too.
The Aer Lingus brand is well know in NI, many of the locals here have often went to Dublin to use Aer Lingus on routes that are not available from here.
Aer Lingus you said need to offer something better and better customer service, as someone who uses both of the carriers I think that the Aer Lingus product is better. Better planes, better experience, ie pre select seats. However, have to say Easyjet staff particularly the BFS base crew are very tuned into the customers needs and are totally aware that passengers have a choice in many markets and they do go the extra mile. This costs nothing to the airlines.
In Gatwick , the market is huge, If Aer Lingus can attract the customer once they will come back, and at best it is very early days. Aer Lingus need a smaller aircraft in Belfast in my view. Developing new markets such as Munich, Milan etc a 172 seater is too big.
Aer Lingus have made the big mistake of bowing down to Easyjet at Belfast by axing many of the main routes eg Amsterdam. Easyjet have nothing to be afraid of in LGW as they know that Aer Lingus will stick it out for so long until easyjet beat them down and then they will pull out.
In summary, what I am saying is that I dont believe that the same experience may be replicated at LGW as London is a huge market. However, as it is LGW, easyjet will probably follow them onto any new route that they open.. except Knock of course :-)
What about LGW to city of Derry, this has to be a great opportunity, Ryanair have cut back Stansted, and LGW is the better gateway.. what does anyone else think?
EI-BUD
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree about outsourcing the ground, except check-in. Those costs need to be cut. I think EI will burn through more cash though by offering a redundancy package. Its not ideal, but it will save them a lot in the longer term.
BFS seems to becoming mostly bucket and spade flights, plus the LHR link. Not a good sign. If its not performing, it should be dropped, or just operate the routes that are doing well on W rotations from LGW.
Ideally EI would partner with BA. BA is focusing on LHR and F/J traffic. EI could pick up the slack and operate from DUB, aswell as MAN and LGW were BA dont want to focus on anymore
BFS seems to becoming mostly bucket and spade flights, plus the LHR link. Not a good sign. If its not performing, it should be dropped, or just operate the routes that are doing well on W rotations from LGW.
Ideally EI would partner with BA. BA is focusing on LHR and F/J traffic. EI could pick up the slack and operate from DUB, aswell as MAN and LGW were BA dont want to focus on anymore
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Belfast, UK
Age: 43
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with alot of what you said and competing with Easyjet but I would add, Belfast is a small market, in many of the markets that Aer Lingus went onto eg Geneva, Nice, Amsterdam, Paris, London etc, there was gross over capacity, and while Aer Lingus had awful loads on some of the routes, easyjet have been suffering too.
Anyway back to EI. All this doom and gloom about BFS. Yes AMS, CDG and other did pretty rubbish, but is ACE not doing pretty damn well, and with TFS coming this winter the same could potentially happen. Malaga and Faro must be doing well for them, every time frequencies are dropped on other routes its seems these are the destinations that pick up the slack. Malaga being kept on through the winter. With LHR, while I am not privy to yeild info, are EI not carrying more per flight than bmi?? Surely not a terrible sign. BD traffic -11% from last year on BHD, Ei traffic +5% for same period. Whether its EI spin, but have recent press releases re Belfast not been pretty positive of late, booking levels the same as DUB and ORK, and the base will break even this year. Why on earth pull BFS now, when its potentially getting to the stage of making money???
BFS seems to becoming mostly bucket and spade flights, plus the LHR link. Not a good sign.
To control capacity it seems like BFS is down to two based aircraft in winter 09/10. Maybe this will help matters, but until the NI travellers get a bit of imagination, EI might as well go for the bulkier routes that can sustain more than one operator and make a profit, the bucket and spade routes.
I hope they continue to improve at BFS, travelled with them many a time and service is excellent.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, outsourcing is one option, but I think that the fundamental issue is that EI is bringing way too much capacity onto routes which, were they operated with smaller aircraft, would probably do quite well. EI already - even now - gets surprisingly good transfer numbers from European flights, but the UK market, where they used to be very strong - back in the days of ALC - has been practically abandoned to FR, with EI now having one daily flight to major centres (like EDI for example), where it used to have three.
Two solutions:
- Either a smaller aircraft for itself, or alternatively,
- develop the relationship with RE, which will see a significant downturn once the PSO is withdrawn from domestic flights
Of the new generation of 100 seater jets - Canadair CS, Embraer 170/190, Mitsubishi MRJ, Canadair 900/1000 - are there any which can come anywhere near FR's operating costs? Don't forget that this is becoming quite a crowded marketplace, so it's pretty much a buyer's market.
Instead of replacing older 320s (or the planned 330 cancellations) with newer 320s, consider the 319, which could be operated by three cabin crew.
Consider whether the 350 - which is quite a large aircraft (considerably bigger in capacity than the current 333) is the right aircraft for EI going fwd. Sure, an aircraft of that size might be fine for the trunk routes like JFK, BOS or ORD, but probably not much use for expanding into new markets, which EI should be looking to do, once the current problems are behind them. Maybe it's time to look again at the 787? (If, as has been rumoured, EI develops a relationship with AF/KL, then perhaps EI could benefit from AF/KL's planned huge A350/787 order?)
EI has long been touting the potential of DUB as a hub, particularly with the opening of T2 - which will have US immigration AND customs preclearance; isn't it about time to look at the scheduling of flights, to maximise the potential of this operation? For example, SFO leaves at 9.40 - useless for connections. So, like DXB - which was axed before it was ever allowed to reach its potential due to poor planning - SFO could be lost simply because it was operated at the wrong time?
As a Plan B, consider the possibility of an off-shoot long haul operator, using some of the older 330s in a high density layout, to explore the potential of long haul low cost; the A330 is already one of the most economical t/a aircraft around; totally written down (from a balance sheet standpoint) and with a high density layout, it could help stimulate demand in some US markets?
Two solutions:
- Either a smaller aircraft for itself, or alternatively,
- develop the relationship with RE, which will see a significant downturn once the PSO is withdrawn from domestic flights
Of the new generation of 100 seater jets - Canadair CS, Embraer 170/190, Mitsubishi MRJ, Canadair 900/1000 - are there any which can come anywhere near FR's operating costs? Don't forget that this is becoming quite a crowded marketplace, so it's pretty much a buyer's market.
Instead of replacing older 320s (or the planned 330 cancellations) with newer 320s, consider the 319, which could be operated by three cabin crew.
Consider whether the 350 - which is quite a large aircraft (considerably bigger in capacity than the current 333) is the right aircraft for EI going fwd. Sure, an aircraft of that size might be fine for the trunk routes like JFK, BOS or ORD, but probably not much use for expanding into new markets, which EI should be looking to do, once the current problems are behind them. Maybe it's time to look again at the 787? (If, as has been rumoured, EI develops a relationship with AF/KL, then perhaps EI could benefit from AF/KL's planned huge A350/787 order?)
EI has long been touting the potential of DUB as a hub, particularly with the opening of T2 - which will have US immigration AND customs preclearance; isn't it about time to look at the scheduling of flights, to maximise the potential of this operation? For example, SFO leaves at 9.40 - useless for connections. So, like DXB - which was axed before it was ever allowed to reach its potential due to poor planning - SFO could be lost simply because it was operated at the wrong time?
As a Plan B, consider the possibility of an off-shoot long haul operator, using some of the older 330s in a high density layout, to explore the potential of long haul low cost; the A330 is already one of the most economical t/a aircraft around; totally written down (from a balance sheet standpoint) and with a high density layout, it could help stimulate demand in some US markets?
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2,782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Either a smaller aircraft for itself, or alternatively
I couldnt agree more on this one, if we look at Flybe; Ryanair have totally avoided direct competition with Flybe and in my view this is because the markets where Flybe operate often lend themselves well to a reasonably high frequency that wouldnt warrant a 737 any more than daily.
If Aer Lingus took on this approach, they could become very effective in the fight against Ryanair.
but have recent press releases re Belfast not been pretty positive of late, booking levels the same as DUB and ORK, and the base will break even this year. Why on earth pull BFS now, when its potentially getting to the stage of making money???
I am not sure things are too good. I am a big fan of EI,use them often but dont work for them. I do hope that they are here for the long run.
However, lets say hypothetically that Aer Lingus axed Belfast? Would Ryanair be attracted to BFS? If the runway extention gets the red light in the end, will Ryanair be happy to work with BHD?
What does anyone else think?
EI-BUD