Monarch 4
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MIDDLE EAST
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dboy
I think whatever anybody is going to say on this thread, your viewpoint will not change.
The argument you make is one of fairness? Well, would you consider it fair that a premiership football club pays millions to sign on a known player from an opposing team even though they have many young soccer cadets in their own ranks? Maybe you'd be happy to have your teeth looked at by a student dentist compared to one with 20 years experience under their belt or have some major house renovation undertaken by a brand new builder plucked from yellow pages compared to one with 30 years experience and comes highly recommended? Recommendation based on years of previous experience.
Ultimately, it's not about jumping the queue simply because there isn't one. Every person applying for an airline job does so on their own merit and is assessed as such. Unless you are completely naive to this industry, you'll know by now that it's driven by supply and demand. It's market forces. Regardless of whether there's a shortage or a glut of good qualified pilots, it's the airline prerogative who they take and when. If a pool of pilots with a proven history suddenly become available, it would make bad business sense not to consider them. They're a proven entity and have heaps of experience under their belt. Training costs are reduced, they also add to the bottom line of safety with their years of simulator assessments. Remember, in it's almost 50 year history, Monarch did not suffer one hull loss. That's not just luck (although there's always elements of that), that's testament to the quality of their pilots and the training department and Culture within the Company. The airline itself had a sterling reputation amongst other airlines for the morale and can do attitude as well as the standard of it's operation. This includes the high safety standard set by the cabin crew. That will and has counted for something and is the very reason why the airlines are making a beeline for the crew.
Does that not make a logical argument?
I think whatever anybody is going to say on this thread, your viewpoint will not change.
The argument you make is one of fairness? Well, would you consider it fair that a premiership football club pays millions to sign on a known player from an opposing team even though they have many young soccer cadets in their own ranks? Maybe you'd be happy to have your teeth looked at by a student dentist compared to one with 20 years experience under their belt or have some major house renovation undertaken by a brand new builder plucked from yellow pages compared to one with 30 years experience and comes highly recommended? Recommendation based on years of previous experience.
Ultimately, it's not about jumping the queue simply because there isn't one. Every person applying for an airline job does so on their own merit and is assessed as such. Unless you are completely naive to this industry, you'll know by now that it's driven by supply and demand. It's market forces. Regardless of whether there's a shortage or a glut of good qualified pilots, it's the airline prerogative who they take and when. If a pool of pilots with a proven history suddenly become available, it would make bad business sense not to consider them. They're a proven entity and have heaps of experience under their belt. Training costs are reduced, they also add to the bottom line of safety with their years of simulator assessments. Remember, in it's almost 50 year history, Monarch did not suffer one hull loss. That's not just luck (although there's always elements of that), that's testament to the quality of their pilots and the training department and Culture within the Company. The airline itself had a sterling reputation amongst other airlines for the morale and can do attitude as well as the standard of it's operation. This includes the high safety standard set by the cabin crew. That will and has counted for something and is the very reason why the airlines are making a beeline for the crew.
Does that not make a logical argument?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You've forgotten one more important point: which pilot is available immediately?
Recent flying on type, LPC/OPC valid, medical valid and available from tomorrow. No need for any notice period of one to three months.
It's just good business.
Recent flying on type, LPC/OPC valid, medical valid and available from tomorrow. No need for any notice period of one to three months.
It's just good business.
dboy,
Your profile states:
You then state:
That attitude certainly does not reflect reality here on Earth.
When a large number of people are applying for a smaller number of jobs, it is not a queue it is a competition. The employers job is to make their company run as efficiently as possible and and this will be achieved by taking on the most competent candidates.
If you were starting up an airline and decided to take on pilots based on how long they had been waiting for jobs, your company would go out of business very quickly. That would of course mean that you had been very fair to all of the candidates, but would you actually have done any of them any good?
Your profile states:
Location: Planet earth
"join the queue like everbody else."
When a large number of people are applying for a smaller number of jobs, it is not a queue it is a competition. The employers job is to make their company run as efficiently as possible and and this will be achieved by taking on the most competent candidates.
If you were starting up an airline and decided to take on pilots based on how long they had been waiting for jobs, your company would go out of business very quickly. That would of course mean that you had been very fair to all of the candidates, but would you actually have done any of them any good?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@harry,
Yes you make logical arguments, and yes it will not change my point of view.
However the fact that easy, Virgin and others are literally refering on their webpage to Monarch people, rather than "rated people" is a slap in the face for the people who are rated but can not apply because they are not coming from Monarch.
I was also unlucky in the past being unemployed. But guess what? Nobody did me a favour, i had to redo everything. I learned the hard way. Empathy for the M. People, yes absolutely, but also for the not monarch people trying to get in somewhere but getting bypassed just because of some bankruptcy of a beloved airline coming in the media. And yes, you can call me naive.
Well i guess this is indeed a endless discussion. Just lets hope aviation in Europe keeps on booming.
Yes you make logical arguments, and yes it will not change my point of view.
However the fact that easy, Virgin and others are literally refering on their webpage to Monarch people, rather than "rated people" is a slap in the face for the people who are rated but can not apply because they are not coming from Monarch.
I was also unlucky in the past being unemployed. But guess what? Nobody did me a favour, i had to redo everything. I learned the hard way. Empathy for the M. People, yes absolutely, but also for the not monarch people trying to get in somewhere but getting bypassed just because of some bankruptcy of a beloved airline coming in the media. And yes, you can call me naive.
Well i guess this is indeed a endless discussion. Just lets hope aviation in Europe keeps on booming.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not about doing anyone "a favour". It's all about doing themselves a favour. These airline recruiters are not flying out of the woodwork to set up roadshows and interviews because they feel sorry for Monarch pilots. It's because they need rated pilots and they know they can get an ex-Monarch pilot through the whole recruitment and training program in double quick time because they know their ratings are all current, valid, and the pilots are immediately available .
It's just good, efficient business practice - ruthless if you like. Even O'Leary's bunch turned up in double quick time and we know his mob don't feel sorry for anyone. I've heard many didn't turn up at his Manchester open day but I'm sure he'll get some eventually.
It's just good, efficient business practice - ruthless if you like. Even O'Leary's bunch turned up in double quick time and we know his mob don't feel sorry for anyone. I've heard many didn't turn up at his Manchester open day but I'm sure he'll get some eventually.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your typical ex-employee from a company in administration is going to have an immediate reduction of cash coming in, and bills to pay. There are always plenty who are not prepared and don't have any rainy-day funds or even a float in their bank accounts, they have their direct debits go out the day after pay day. When pay day ain't gonna happen, they are desperate. Will they negotiate hard for a good deal, or will they take the first offer that pays enough particularly if it comes with a signing bonus?
It's just good business.
The last time it happened to me, I had me and project team signed up to work directly for the end customer within 24hrs, I was well pleased with myself (and I do keep rainy day funds). Over the next two weeks the phone rang itself off the hook with (quite possibly) better offers and I realised it wasn't necessarily me that had done really well, but the project manager at the customer who had moved extremely fast to save the project.
Just business.
Now, if you want some real cynical speculation - did a certain airline's strategic rota planning <cough> involve effectively betting on a certain other airline going bust a few months sooner than it did?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dboy
The likes of Easy's experience level will go up should a bunch of Monarch Pilots join. I suspect time to command was different to Easy (or was in the "old days") so as many posters have said a load of guys joining probably staying where they are based will be a big asset if you look at it from a global perspective rather than individually.
It might be more difficult for guys in the LHS?
Good luck to all
The likes of Easy's experience level will go up should a bunch of Monarch Pilots join. I suspect time to command was different to Easy (or was in the "old days") so as many posters have said a load of guys joining probably staying where they are based will be a big asset if you look at it from a global perspective rather than individually.
It might be more difficult for guys in the LHS?
Good luck to all
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Infrequentflyer789, I take your points completely and I hope the Monarch pilots will bear this in mind before rushing into anything, as there does seem to be plenty of work out there that may be quickly available but which may not be totally suitable in then medium term.
My response though was purely in reply to dBoy's comments and obvious disappointment at seeing a particular group of pilots getting what seemed to him to be an unfair preference and sympathy vote. (I also get his point, by the way). My post was purely in answer to why an out of work Monarch pilot would be considered for a "fast track" by any employer looking to fill some vacancies in quick time with decent quality aircrew. That's not to say dBoy and other pilots wishing to progress to these companies are not of an equal standard or maybe even better, but good business sense recognises the easiest and most efficient options that carry the least risk.
As for taking the wrong job too quickly, a lot of these potential employers are fairly blue chip, UK operators, like VA, Easy, Jet 2, Thomson, even Ryanair. So a pilot wouldn't go too far wrong working for any of these. The overseas companies have been advertising through the recruitment agencies for quite some time so if pilots like dBoy had wanted to move on to any of them then there was nothing stopping them and certainly no preferential treatment for any pilot group.
(I say "blue chip companies". So was Monarch, once. And Swissair and Sabena. Air France joining with KLM? BA with Iberia? Pan Am, TWA? Even EK needed a bail out, or was it the whole of Dubai that needed a rescue from their neighbours? Now Qatar has become a 5-star political pariah. The lesson is that there are no guarantees in this business).
My response though was purely in reply to dBoy's comments and obvious disappointment at seeing a particular group of pilots getting what seemed to him to be an unfair preference and sympathy vote. (I also get his point, by the way). My post was purely in answer to why an out of work Monarch pilot would be considered for a "fast track" by any employer looking to fill some vacancies in quick time with decent quality aircrew. That's not to say dBoy and other pilots wishing to progress to these companies are not of an equal standard or maybe even better, but good business sense recognises the easiest and most efficient options that carry the least risk.
As for taking the wrong job too quickly, a lot of these potential employers are fairly blue chip, UK operators, like VA, Easy, Jet 2, Thomson, even Ryanair. So a pilot wouldn't go too far wrong working for any of these. The overseas companies have been advertising through the recruitment agencies for quite some time so if pilots like dBoy had wanted to move on to any of them then there was nothing stopping them and certainly no preferential treatment for any pilot group.
(I say "blue chip companies". So was Monarch, once. And Swissair and Sabena. Air France joining with KLM? BA with Iberia? Pan Am, TWA? Even EK needed a bail out, or was it the whole of Dubai that needed a rescue from their neighbours? Now Qatar has become a 5-star political pariah. The lesson is that there are no guarantees in this business).
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BCAR SectionL wrote (Way back on page 7): "Lots of high praise being thrown around here which didn't happen in the air berlin thread.
So to stop me getting confused can someone please identify what great innovative idea monarch brought to aviation that made them so good?"
They were decent to their pilots, treated them with respect, trained them well and paid them accordingly, with good Ts & Cs. The management worked well with the unions, not in constant confrontation, hence the goodwill returned by the pilots was enormous. They at least tried to always do the right thing for their passengers. They hardly cancelled flights when the chips were down, unlike most others.
Until 2nd October they were the UK's longest holder of an AOC under their original name. Longer than Thomson/TUI and also BA. The former used to be Britannia, the latter BOAC and BEA. Britannia started their operation only a year earlier than Monarch, maybe two. Monarch were the first UK operator to gain Cat 3B approval and ETOPS approval, (more or less the same time as BA), after they took the risk of buying new, white-tailed 757s, the first UK operator to do so and, I'm told, only the third in the world. These started transatlantic long haul (hence the ETOPS) for the charter market which was quite revolutionary.
But that was then. They didn't introduce lo-cost short haul, contract pilot practices, fees for baggage and boarding passes, punishing rosters using FTLs as targets, questionable business practices with their airports, or any of the other generally cut-throat nastiness that appeared twenty or so years ago. It was never in the company's nature or culture. Hence it was Monarch's throat that was ultimately cut. That's business.
So, BCAR Section L, nothing truly "innovative" or totally game-changing, but that wasn't the point and that's not why they are missed.
So to stop me getting confused can someone please identify what great innovative idea monarch brought to aviation that made them so good?"
They were decent to their pilots, treated them with respect, trained them well and paid them accordingly, with good Ts & Cs. The management worked well with the unions, not in constant confrontation, hence the goodwill returned by the pilots was enormous. They at least tried to always do the right thing for their passengers. They hardly cancelled flights when the chips were down, unlike most others.
Until 2nd October they were the UK's longest holder of an AOC under their original name. Longer than Thomson/TUI and also BA. The former used to be Britannia, the latter BOAC and BEA. Britannia started their operation only a year earlier than Monarch, maybe two. Monarch were the first UK operator to gain Cat 3B approval and ETOPS approval, (more or less the same time as BA), after they took the risk of buying new, white-tailed 757s, the first UK operator to do so and, I'm told, only the third in the world. These started transatlantic long haul (hence the ETOPS) for the charter market which was quite revolutionary.
But that was then. They didn't introduce lo-cost short haul, contract pilot practices, fees for baggage and boarding passes, punishing rosters using FTLs as targets, questionable business practices with their airports, or any of the other generally cut-throat nastiness that appeared twenty or so years ago. It was never in the company's nature or culture. Hence it was Monarch's throat that was ultimately cut. That's business.
So, BCAR Section L, nothing truly "innovative" or totally game-changing, but that wasn't the point and that's not why they are missed.
Last edited by earnest; 7th Oct 2017 at 14:56.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been said that Monarch are 'in administration'. Is that true? I taught this was there same as US Chapter 11 and as such allows the company to continue to operate as it restructures itself. What is the truth? Further, Monarch serviced may 000's of pax to a huge variety of destinations. Their disappearance will create a large hole in supply for their winter & next summer's destinations. Who is going to step up and fix that void? It will not just be re-emplying the pilots, but finding airframes as well. What is the plan from their competitors? It would be ironic if someone steps in and resurrects Monarch Mk.2, refinances the a/c and finds no pilots or cabin crew.
Any solid knowledge out there?
Any solid knowledge out there?
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: STN
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US Chapter 11 differs from UK Administration in that Chapter 11 specifically allows a company to reorganise without the pressure from creditors. UK Administration doesn't preclude it (BHS etc.) but it's not as straightforward as in the US. Plus of course as has been said elsewhere creditors of an airline can easily impound assets which makes it difficult.
I suspect it's more a case of terminology and (possibly) lazy reporting. Realistically Monarch is "in liquidation" which I believe is the equivalent of US Chapter 7 but may have begun "in administration".
In principle Monarch could be sold as an entire business although the chances of this are effectively zilch. Once the administrators formally decide that it is not possible to sell Monarch as a going concern then it becomes a case of liquidation. I suspect a similar case can occur in the US i.e. a business can start in Chapter 11 but then can move to Chapter 7.
In terms of continuing to operate I believe the board decided that it would not be feasible to continue normal operations as the demands of "money up front" would not be sustainable.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Near sheep!
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who can ramp up? Don't underestimate the market powers of Tui and Thomas Cook. The Tommy Cook books are not as healthy, but these are very strategic companies (TUI in particular). TCX grabbing some of the a/c and crew would have fitted nicely given the fleet Commonality with theirs.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 76
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When a company goes into administration, a team of accountants move in try first to see what can be done to keep the business a going concern. If this can't be done, they will usually move to try to raise funds to settle liabilities. If and when they decide the game is up and nothing further can be done the next steps are usually bankruptcy, a winding up order and liquidators appointed on behalf of the court to liquidate what assets remain in order to pay off creditors. And the bad news is, of course, employees are treated as unsecured creditors and are at the bottom of the list for pay-outs.