View Full Version : Monarch

22nd Aug 2003, 05:39
Monarch :cool:
To all those people thinking of joining Monarch please let me tell you it is not the same great company it used to be. There are a whole lot of things that have changed and perhaps some of those need to be high lighted here. Firstly the management has a bean counter at the head, who at this times is heading for a head to head with the pilots. Most pilots are very hissed off at not getting any pay rise over the last two years. A laughable increase was given recently, ha! while most have knuckled down and worked very hard, and still are, management have seen it fit to drive them further down, the WMD they are using is still the old , 9/11 and our profit margins are down, etc. Yet we are working harder, flying more, the planes are full. Does that sound familiar? Because its a private company you can not see the company reports, so how do we ever know how the company is doing? I don't recall any company ever saying its having a good year, including monarch!
The final salary company pension scheme is not now available for now entrants and the top hat scheme which meant your pension grew by 11% each year after 55 is now reduced to 7%. It was a reason why pilots stayed on, but now a lot of guys are thinking otherwise. certainly there is no reason for FO's to give any loyality by staying, especially as commands are over 8 years off.
The 757 crews are equally hissed off as they seem to be flying 3 tel aviv trips every week on level two FTL variation. incidently why does the CAA allow this to become a normal way of rostering flights. Also I hear that lots of 757 pilots who volunteered for the Airbus fleet this year have missed out because someone has been offering out of seniority postings onto the fleet.
There are also lots of positionnings after flights and its not unusual to complete a long night duty followed by hanging out in an airport lounge for a few hours before flying or taxing back just so the company saves a hotel room and some allowances.
Flight sector pay does not excist and call out pay on days off, though just increased is still way below national average. At the moment the company seems keen on using brand new CTC pilots on loan from a easy airline, these guys only cost allowances and no permanant contact, its not a way of protecting jobs or conditions for anyone. No one thinks what will happen on a dark and dirty night somewhere in the greek islands when the chips are down?
So if you are thinking of joinning, remember that its the guys who work there who made it a great company, the feeling is not so good at the moment, the coming months may produce a mass exodus, a work to rule may shortly follow. Maybe someone at the top may realise loyalty and goodwill deserve to be rewarded, but once lost, they can not be retrieved easly. However if all these issues resolve there selves, get in fast! ::O

22nd Aug 2003, 15:31
Whoa there,

Please give us examples of these allowances which are well under the market rate. As one who is certainly targeting Monarch, and already a victim of terms and conditions which I think would even make you think you were working for an arche angel, I would certainly like the info to avoid the possibility of jumping from th frying pan into the fire.

Anthony Carn
22nd Aug 2003, 15:45

I'm not a Monarch pilot, but up until recently have always thought of them as a happy company.

Your post describes what is now a general trend throughout the UK airline industry, based what I hear from friends, colleagues and on PPRuNe. It's sad to hear that Monarch are falling into the abyss. IMHO, generating unhappiness and resentment will eventually be counter-productive, even destructive.

A big thanks for a very open, forthright post ; most of the pilots in my outfit are too apathetic, scared of their own shadows and restricted by their terms of employment to put their true feelings into print. (observers please note)


22nd Aug 2003, 16:00
<<3 tel aviv trips every week on level two FTL variation>>
Could you post the planned roster for this trip, just to let us get an idea, and point out what the "level 2 FTL variation" implies i.e. what normal scheme allows, and what extra they get by doing this?


Devils Advocate
22nd Aug 2003, 16:32
Chapter and verse from our company Ops manual:'LEVEL 2 VARIATION'

Flight Crew

a) Where a planned sector length does not exceed 7½ hours, the Company may plan 60 minutes extra on the allowable FDP obtained from Table A.

b) 2 Local nights (minimum 34 hours ) free from all duties must be achieved prior to an extended flight duty period.

c) Flight crew members must be acclimatised.

d) Commander’s normal discretion to extend an FDP is reduced to a maximum of 2 hours with no more than 1 hour being exercised prior to leaving the initial point of departure.

e) Where a Commander exercises discretion which uses any portion of the time allowed after leaving the initial point of departure, then a report will be submitted to the authority.

f) One day off must be achieved following the extended FDP.

g) A maximum of 3 extended FDP flights may be undertaken in any consecutive 28 day period.

h) Maximum duty hours will be 180 hours in any consecutive 28 day period in which the use of this extension takes place.

i) Minimum number of days off for flight crew operating one or more of these flights will be 9 in any consecutive 28 day period in which the use of this extension takes place.

j) Despatch crews will not be used.

k) Rosters will be annotated when an L2 variation is planned.

Cabin Crew

a) Cabin crew may be planned for an extra 30 minutes on their normal FDP.

b) Cabin Crew members must be off duty by 22:00 local on the day prior o the extended FDP so that either a rest period equivalent to the preceding duty or a minimum of 11 hours rest is achieved, and discretion to reduce rest prior to or following such a flight may not be exercised.

c) Cabin Crew must be acclimatised.

d) A maximum of 4 extended FDP flights may be undertaken in any consecutive 28 day period.

e) One day off must be achieved following the extended FDP.

f) Maximum duty hours will be 205 hours in any consecutive 28 day period in which the use of this extension takes place.

g) Minimum number of days off for flight crew operating one or more of these flights will be 8 in any consecutive 28 day period in which the use of this extension takes place.

What tonyflaire purports w.r.t 'The 757 crews are equally hissed off as they seem to be flying 3 tel aviv trips every week on level two FTL variation' is not possible under L2V - being limited by section g) for pilots (above), i.e. no more than 3 L2V's are permitted in any 28 day period.

Nb. I do not work for Monarch and maybe their L2V is different ( though somehow I doubt it )

22nd Aug 2003, 16:56
Can't you get the accounts through Companies House? I think it costs a small fee however or find an accountant/mate that has access to it on the web (chargeable service)


22nd Aug 2003, 17:03

The morale as you know has been better however which UK airline over the last couple of years has not had a hard time? I will offer my opinion on the points you raised.

1 Pay rise: we have just had 1% which we were promised from last year this years rise is having its final negotiations in september.

2 How many airlines offer new entrants a final salary scheme now? even BA have stopped theirs. The company in order to keep the scheme for the current pilots is putting in approx 6% more of our basic salary while we are having to contribute 2%.
The top hat scheme will vary over the years, yes it has just gone down however it will probably go up again in the future.

3 Day off payment i agree is not great £250 for f/o £350 for capt however you do not have to work a day if you do not want to and two years ago we did not have any payment at all.

4 I cannot imagine any crews doing 3 TLV a week it is not legal or did you mean there are 3 TLV flights a week on the 757

5 positioning after night duties i have noticed no difference, in EDI this summer they are giving us 12 hours off after a night duty prior to airlining home which twe never used to get.

6 Sector pay is not popular with the pilots however BALPA are looking into it at the moment

7 The CTC pilots by all accounts are very good.

8 Very few pilots leave there have been less that 5 this year.

I still think MON is probably the best airline in the UK however as you say we have an accountant at the controls who is keen to cut costs but we have to give him the benefit of the doubt( at the moment) as the last 2 years have not been easy.

22nd Aug 2003, 17:09

Getting the Accounts through CH is possible... However, they are likely to be pretty meaningless. It is very easy to "massage" the accounts, and most largish companies operate as a network of Ltd. companies, and trying to unravel this lot is very difficult.

It is for this reason that Virgin's "Profit" and "Loss" declarations need to be watched carefully. "Virgin Atlantic" is one limited company of a network of 50+ largely owned and run by RB. A lot of the other companies are effectively subsidiaries, and only trade with VA. So if RB wishes to show a loss (e.g. "cos of big bad BA"), then a subsidiary charges excessive amounts for their services. Result, RB has same amount of money, but VA shows a loss (and some subsidiary you've never heard of does very well, but nobody notices). vv this year when "big bad BA" made a loss, so lets show how well VA is doing = declare a profit!

This may have been restricted somewhat now with SA involved, but this will be due to the terms they agreed - not due to reporting requirements etc.

BMI is (was?) rumoured to do the same - large "handling charges" applied in the CI = money shifting offshore. I have to say this is only a rumour - I do not know if BMI fly (or flew) to the CI - but the principle is there.

CH reporting requirements are designed to prevent fraud, and offer some transparency. However, they are not designed to see the true profit and loss state of a company, hence why the IR reporting requirments are different (effectively requiring the network of companies to report as one).

plc requirements are much stricter, since they are designed to show potential and current public investors what's really happening...

Given the rumours of who really owns Monarch, there's no doubt a large offshore element involved, and I doubt you'd ever get a true reflection...


22nd Aug 2003, 19:10

SQ have been on board for a few years now and if VS did that in the passed (I'm not saying the did'nt), SQ would not allow them to do it now. The audit committee is SQ WMD for VS.

If VS state they made a profit I think they did, VS seem to be run better and better these days and rememeber Branson is the figure head and the Board make the big decisions.

22nd Aug 2003, 22:24
Yes, things at Monarch may be better in some ways than at some smaller outfits and yes, you can always find another company where things are worse. However, we used to be the best paid charter airline. More recently, we at least aspired to keep up with BY. We were always a happy company. Now moral is at an all time low. Most pilots are ready for a "work to rule".

22nd Aug 2003, 22:50
Welcome to the world of 21st century Aviation!

22nd Aug 2003, 22:55

Thanks for that - much as I thought (and did hint!)... I was really trying to point out how weak CH are as a source of good info on a company. As you point out - it's SQ who enforce the legitimacy of VS accounts now - not CH (or RB!)

I only knew (roughly) what went on when I was at VS, and that's well before SQ came along...


23rd Aug 2003, 00:20
Only us make that famous 21st century aviation. But we're too shy to come out with even the slightest move, apart from barking on Pprune.

We are digging our own graves.

23rd Aug 2003, 06:02
firstly thanks to everyone for their inputs and comments and can i clarify a few points..
with regards to the 757 tel aviv operation, i actually meant the fleet operates 3 night tel avivs weekly on level 2 using heavy crews. these crews rest in the cabin with those lovely passengers, i must ask if any company managenemt pilot has ever operate one of these.
With regard positioning after flights, please check again to see how many times crews are givan hotac after long night flights. YOU WILL FIND MOST CREWS ARE ROSTERED TO POSITION BACK. true the company will provide a hotel if one pushes for it but only if you are prepared to accept no extra allowances! BY and even my travel offer their crews hotac after night flights.
True we never had 350/250 pounds for working a day off, but the rate is still below BY ( almost double ) and virgin. WE were also never so short of crews before. The poor crewing staff not only get grief from pilots but also by their managers, its a thankless task when you don't have the tools.
Quite rightly you say only about 5 pilots have left this year , believe me there are many who are thinking of going. Just watch this space. Of course a lot depends on this years pay negotiations and conditions.
The CTC chaps are mostly good but they lack experience and when the level in the right seat is constanly low, it could prove expensive one day. Of course it makes the CEO's books look very good if he is only paying them / CTC half the salary, after all that is the bottom line.
ps. iam working harder then i have ever done.
pps. Its still a great company, its the guys working here who make it that, it would be sad to see it go the way of others.
good points, you can carry how much fuel you like aand if you make a decision in good faith the company will stick by you

23rd Aug 2003, 16:58
Please take your whinges to the Monarch forum, many would like to discuss, but won't on the open forum.


23rd Aug 2003, 21:19
On the contrary EGGW, Tony's post isn't whinging or ranting, it's merely a factual account from his perspective. ALL of us in this business in the UK wish that things were better. The fact is that it's bad for most UK operators this year, so perhaps we can get a little strength from knowing that we are all in the same boat and hope that we all have a brighter 2004. If not, it seems the exodus to Middle East may continue.

Thanks for the post Tony, let's hope we weather the storm :ok:

24th Aug 2003, 17:08
Of course he's whinging, like most pilots he thinks the airline exits for his benefit and career. Why instead of putting this stuff on a public forum anonymously doesn't he go and see his managers? If you think that Monarch will see a mass exodus look around mate you don't know your born. Pilot shortage, dream on, they are two a penny and when out of work what are they qualified to do? Sourcing the company accounts is a joke most wouldn’t know if they were holding them upside down.

24th Aug 2003, 17:37

Good answer, couldn't agree more.

24th Aug 2003, 18:33
Carruthers, please don't comment until you have at least a rough idea what you are talking about!

25th Aug 2003, 00:15
Please don't assume that we have only been educated to 'cleaning staff' level such as your goodself! A fair percentage of us have degrees in relatively academic subjects such as aeronautical engineering, chemical engineering, quantity surveying etc. So trying to make sense of a balance sheet doesn't really pose a great problem. As for being qualified to do anything else, a number of us run projects outside of flying ranging from property management to a lawnmower repair business.
We are all exremely concerned about the wellfare of the company and our pay and conditions. After 9/11 we agreed to a pay freeze in return for some form of redress at a later stage. Now we have reached that later stage and things have gone rather quiet!

25th Aug 2003, 14:02
But you don't have to be educated beyond 'cleaning staff' level, some may be, but a scan of these forums shows that most aren't. You all demand respect as professionals, what other profession posts publicly in this manner?

25th Aug 2003, 16:57
"what other profession posts publicly in this manner?"

Good point. Bye bye Carruthers.

25th Aug 2003, 17:02
Quantity surveying? Guess that Groundstar's field of excellence (??) then!! LOL

25th Aug 2003, 19:57
I'd suggest that we ignore Carruthers who is either unaware that much of the comment on this website is posted by people who are not professional flight crew or is himself one of those to whom the red warning at the bottom of this page refers.
I wonder if he is sufficiently educated or well read to be aware of one of the more famous literary sources from which his/her nom-de-web is derived.

25th Aug 2003, 22:41
Far From The Madding Crowd

26th Aug 2003, 01:17
Nope! but very apposite for parts of our website. ;)

26th Aug 2003, 05:19
If Hardy is to heavy going try Conan Doyle.

26th Aug 2003, 05:36
He is indeed!
How about Childers?

26th Aug 2003, 15:54
Indeed 'The Riddle of the Sands' rather a common name! Biggles is favourite here of course, except for lawn mower manuals.

Groundstar, I think you will find that most aeronautical engineering graduates would consider their degree more than ‘relatively’ academic! But the point is that no level of academic achievement is necessary to become a pilot. Cramming for a few multi choice questions from the CAA demands little but a spot of application, indeed many of our colleagues failed to achieve A level standard even current A level. You may also find that engineers, surveyors and lawn mower mechanics are least qualified to understand a balance sheet.

26th Aug 2003, 16:43
So tell us, Carruthers, why do you hate pilots?

27th Aug 2003, 14:28
Like children in a playground if you criticise us you hate us. Read the postings, you know better than the managers, ‘bean stealers’, bosses and everyone else, but you never have to put your money where your mouth is. All in all you are better paid with less hassle and responsibility than any other worker, which is simply what you are. You whinge, bitch and moan but the writing is on the wall, you have been sussed. It is the low cost carriers that have shown that you can be hired by the hour, are not a rare and exclusive profession and are available in abundance. It is ludicrous to suggest that the terms and conditions at Monarch are not extremely good, they will not be seen in future companies enjoy it while you can.

27th Aug 2003, 15:34
Of course we've been sussed, it's 2003 and everybody's been sussed. There isn't a profession left that 's not under pressure for more work and less pay with T's and C's heading south. Doesn't hide the fact though that running these airlines are a bunch of empty suits who haven't really been doing an exemplary job of late, fact is, most of the decision making would have been equally effective if made using the dart/dart board principle.
Wasn't aware that the suits were putting their own money where their mouth's were, thought they were losing other peoples cash while collecting an over generous salary for a job poorly done prior to bailing out on golden parachutes. Silly me, live and learn I suppose.
Metaphorically speaking, pilots rarely end up in a smoking hole but the suits seem to crash with monotonous regularity. Come on suits; sit up straight, pull your socks up, put the thinking caps on and give us pilot types nothing to whinge, bitch and moan about. Asking too much from the suits isn't it? Bit like expecting a leopard to change its spots.

the silk one
27th Aug 2003, 15:52
From this thread one would deduce that pilots are generally regarded as professional whingers & suits as nitpicking beancounters, but please wake up - both groups are needed to run an airline. If this truth was accepted, then both groups could work towards a common goal, but suspect that views are too entrenched for this to happen.

27th Aug 2003, 19:16
Unfortunately I don't think that QAR ASR and XL5 are non pilot 'flamers'. Such arrogance and stupidity are typical of the trade.

27th Aug 2003, 23:41
OK, Carruthers, you imply that you don't hate pilots, but why are you spending your time writing this stuff? What do you do for a living?

28th Aug 2003, 01:50
Carruthers -

Why so poisonous?

Get turned down for a job with spotty m?

No "hangar floor sweepers" thread on this forum for you?


28th Aug 2003, 02:03
Carruthers is just a common or garden Troll, just out to cause trouble. :*

Remember trolls hate silence!!!


28th Aug 2003, 04:45
Speaking as an ex-suit (in another industry), I think it must be difficult to manage pilots.
They have massive responsibility whilst flying, but little at other times. They are paid as well as most of the suits, often better. Due to crewing restrictions they have the time to 'network' and whinge. Unusually for highly-paid staff they are (in some airlines) unionised. Their skills can not be replaced, and are central to the organisation. In short, they are educated professionals doing the kind of job that in many other industries would be blue-collar (because flying is high-tech).
Any comments?

PS not all suits are CEOs earning millions

28th Aug 2003, 19:46

Your comments on the whole are correct, with 100's of people seated behind you it is a massive responsibility and they are highly trained and worth the money they are paid. You are also right they are educated (I would add highly) professionals.

But when you put more than one in a room together, all you hear is how much better they can run the compnay and what a hard life they have and what is the best pension scheme on the market etc etc etc. But I think that's just human nature, we all feel we can do better than others.

I must point out I am not a pilot, never wished to be one and have no need to be one.

But they do deserve our respect for what they do and how they do it.

29th Aug 2003, 02:32
For those in Monarch complaining about declining terms and conditions and lack of pay rises. I would say that you should recognise that this is a recession, and most of us are lucky to even retain our jobs. If you need convincing then ask those in Buzz, Debonair, Sabena, Swissair,etc . All pilots in all the airlines are working harder than previously. The CAA website gives the following profit/(loss) before tax for the tax year ending 2002.

Monarch £300,000

Last year will have been worse (ie a sizeable loss), and the coming year worse still.

For comparison:

BA loss ( £187,000,000)
Thomas Cook loss ( £29,000,000)
Brit Mid loss ( £2,200,000)
FlyBE loss ( £16,900,000)
Virgin loss ( £14,500,000)

Britannia profit £63,300,000
Easyjet profit £40,100,000
Go profit £13,900,000
GB profit £12,900,000

29th Aug 2003, 14:32
the point about this thread is, that even in companies like MON where over the last few years there has been little public grumbling, the changes to our conditions of work are slowly and surely deteriorating. I've been in a large charter co. for 4 years, each year has seen a minute payrise (thank you) but also a signifcant increase in workload and reduction in benefits. Basically, each year its become less fun to do the job. I think the pilot community would be more willing to accept the tough times IF, when the good times came again, they thought that the amenities lost, would be restored. However, I believe that one lost, a benefit is lost forever. Therefore pilots must stick up for themselves through BALPA, and fight every step of the way.

29th Aug 2003, 18:50
A few home truths:

£250 quid for working on a day off. I will have some of that. I get £6.89 an hour for working on my day off - its called overtime.

Remember Tony - you were the new guy in the RHS one day. Your job as Captain is to train, nuture and guide the new guys, not slam them for being inexperienced.

I have friends who fly for the likes of Flybe/Easy/Buzz Stansted. Things sound far worse there then your cosy life at Monarch. I friend of mine spent 4 days out of the last month at his "base airport" and was forced to do his line check whilst operating in discrertion recently.

I will have my fATPL finished soon. Would be delighted to take your place at Monarch if you hate it so much.

29th Aug 2003, 19:51

A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. The CAA figures you quote do not state the full financial health of several of the airlines quoted. With airlines the purchase of one aircraft can subtract £50M to the bottom line thus showing a huge financial loss but at the same time add substantially to the airlines assets.

Fortunately in this instance you cannot take the profit of £300000 as the definitive actual profit figure. The reason being Monarch is one of a group of companies that is ultimately owned by the same family. One of these sister companies is an aircraft leasing company that owns aircraft several times the fleet size of Monarch Airlines. The group of companies can make a substantial profit but the airline will not show this because the lease rates from the sister company have increased. It is one of the reasons for employing accountants and makes the most of tax liabilities.

If you look at the Virgin group then you could speculate on something similar.

Wet Power
30th Aug 2003, 00:07

The dayoff payments are very rarely used in my airline.

Their main purpose is to concentrate a crewing officers mind to find an efficient way of solving a problem rather than the way that is easiest for him and, therefore, could result in many pilot's rosters being changed ie. to cover one duty he shifts around half a dozen pilot's duties!

It is good way of making sure that as a (future) pilot you have a stable roster. Something that you will come to appreciate in the future.

The company very rarely pays out for day off duties unless of course they have completely cocked up their crewing levels. It is also down to the pilot if he chooses to work a day off. It , generally, works very well.

PS I am ex KLMuk as well and pleased that I got out when I did. Give me my present company over KLM any day.

30th Aug 2003, 16:53
Alloy -
There seems to be confusion here between the P&L and Balance Sheet.
'Profit' is an art form. You can make it say more or less what you want (and since it's what you pay tax on, you minimise it).
The Balance Sheet is nearer to the truth, but far more complex. That's where the £50m for a new aircraft goes (unless it's on an operating lease). It doesn't come out of profits.
To judge when a business is failing, look out for delayed payments to suppliers, doing deals with new or unstable customers or suppliers, and panic cost-cutting.

30th Aug 2003, 19:50

That is partly my point, you can not just take the CAA figure of £300000 and say that Monarch are just keeping there head above water.

30th Aug 2003, 22:03
For all the budding accountants here :-

"Profit" is opinion.

"Cash Flow" is fact.

31st Aug 2003, 03:56
amazing how this topic (like so many others on pprune recently) has been hijacked and bears not the slightest resemblence to the actual topic by the original poster.....

My own 2 pence worth.... If you don't like your lot, instead of bleating about...do something about it...join another airline, or get a 9 to 5 and really wake up and smell the coffee.

Just don't come back crying after you find that the grass you thought would be greener (or more orange in most cases), is most definately not....

31st Aug 2003, 04:45
I agree with some of what you say. But, an extension of your arguement would mean that Britannia seem to have hopeless accountants. Surely, they ought to be able to loose all that profit, just like Monarch do. Or, perhaps they need a dose of BA accountancy - then they would be able to 'loose' hundreds of millions. The profit figures don't tell the whole story, but they are certainly not irrelevent. The CAA website has details of assets, loans to and from subsidiaries, mortgages, cash at bank etc etc if you care to look.

31st Aug 2003, 06:20

We are bleating because most of us remember what a great company Monarch was to work for. I think you will find a lot of our junior (and not so junior with 10-15 years to command) F/O's will leave for direct Easyjet commands.

31st Aug 2003, 12:36
Dunno what the Monarch guys are complaining about...but in my experience performing substitute flights for them, found their operation to be first rate.
Off to their dispatch office to receive one of the best briefings ever, then very competent ground staff, made for a great company. Best looking hosties as well.
As they are one of the oldest companies flying, they must be doing something right.

Kaptin M
31st Aug 2003, 15:34
Perhaps things may have changed over the last 15 or 20 years since your retirement, 411A :rolleyes:

Wet Power
31st Aug 2003, 21:42
Just for info but some of the so-called 'junior' First Officers in Monarch have anything between 7000-10000 flying hours ie. ripe for the picking if the market picks up and they are still looking at 10 years to command.

2nd Sep 2003, 19:17
411A - You flew the MD11 for us I believe, route proving for our A330's.

Things are different now, all has changed in the last 2 years. The new MD seems to have a mandate to cut costs everywhere, including pilot's benefits.

For those who say that we shouldn't complain as it is worse elsewhere have their heads in the sand.

If companies such as BA, MON, BY, MYT, and AMM do not fight against the deterioration of benefits where will the incentive be for companies such as EZY, FlyBe, KLMuk etc to improve or maintain their benefits?

2nd Sep 2003, 22:29
Sad to hear that, fmgc, from what I could see, one slick operation.
Best of luck.

28th Sep 2003, 04:40
This is for all you gents seatting at the front seat of the tube, complaining of everything and anything. You should all be very happy that you have 1% plus 3.2% pay rise. Cabin crew that work as hard as you boys have had nothing? Yes nothing, but still we get to work wishing for the best not just for our selfs but for all of us, flight deck and cabin crew. What you dont realise is that we need that litle pay rise as bad as you do, so what you boys need to do is fight for everybody not just for your selfs.

28th Sep 2003, 07:47
such comments aeroplano should be reserved for the private forum.

29th Sep 2003, 00:32
Aeroplano, the pilots union Balpa have got the latest deal on the table , support your union with a chunk of your salary get profesional negotiators in to support you company council and talk with management and things may change. The fact the pilots have an offer on the table may well help your cause but dont acuse the flightdeck of not understanding your plight or the work you all put in dealing with the SLF. Most if not all the work force could do with a little more to counter Mr Browns (G) stealth taxes.:rolleyes:

29th Sep 2003, 22:10
I am certainly not qualified to comment on your rostering concerns, but your comments on pay and pension I think are misplaced. Only a union airline employee would complain about no pay raises in two years. You still have a job, which many employees in non-union jobs in other industries do not.

I realize that you cannot acertain Monarch's financial condition, but do you really think that high load factors mean profits right now? I know you are smarter than that. The airline biz is going through a meaningful transition, and even charter operators are not immune from the upheaval. Costs are more important than they ever have been and pilots alone are 10-15% of the industry's cost burden.

Pay- and service-dependent pensions are going by the wayside. They are simply too expensive now that people are living longer. Retire at 55 or 60 depending on your country, and draw a large cheque for another 15 or 20 years or more. It's very hard to generate enough of a return on your small personal contribution to fund this expense. How about saving money, living in a smaller house, etc., to fund your retirement like most other folks who do not have pensions? I know you charter guys don't make the same pay as you would at the majors, but it's still a tad better than the average university grad, I dare say.

There is surplus of pilots globally, so if you don't like the pay and benefits at Monarch, you can be replaced easily and you can go work somewhere else or change to a different industry. Crying about no pay raises in this environment I think is insulting to those of us who do track financials of this industry and see how painfully sticky pilots wages and benefits are. You don't know how good you have it -- enjoy it while you can, because it is not sustainable.

30th Sep 2003, 06:01

So what do you suggest? We keep shtum, never complain, bend over and have penny pinching faceless corporate boxticking beancounters who know jack sh1t about flying give us a right royal reaming?

Or perhaps we should form a union, kick and fight against this and perhaps do something to preserve our terms and conditions - oh, I'm sorry we did that already.

Perhaps you think big houses are the preserve of professional footballers, rock stars and cabinet ministers? Sorry, but does a pilot having a bigger house offend your socialist sensibilities?

And there's another thing. The UK charter industry spent millions over decades getting away from the 3rd. rate bucket shop image. Unfortunately there's a new generation of "financials tracking" managers who don't remember this, but alot of pilots do. So go ahead, reduce costs to the bone. Get rid of all your expensive long serving pilots and replace them with chinese or eastern bloc pilots on a pittance of a wage. Get them flying a load of old rustbuckets. And watch your customers bitch and moan, and probably die as a result of your narrow-mindedness, complacency and desire to make a quick buck. It's a case of been there done that, and I wouldn't for one want to go back to it.

You might gripe about pilots costing 10-15% of the industry's cost burden, but believe me that's much, much cheaper than a hull-loss fatal accident and all the liability that ensues. Besides, 10-15% is a small amount to spend on a vital component of the business.

And if ever people like you get to run this industry then I won't be part of it.

30th Sep 2003, 20:41
AEROPLANO, I think our Directors would refuse to discuss cabin crew pay with BALPA. You have your own union - use it!

5th Oct 2003, 03:37
10 - 15% ? Errr I was under the impression it was more like 2% of direct operating costs. Unless of course you believe the article on EJ's costs in the tabloid press!