View Full Version : More unrest at ryanair

27th Nov 2004, 21:11
Just read this more trouble at ryanair.

A number of senior Ryanair pilots have made a complaint about victimisation in the workplace to the Labour Relations Commission (LRC). The complaint stems from the actions of the airline's senior management, who are seeking to persuade the pilots to accept terms and conditions attached to their training to fly new aircraft.

Ryanair has told the pilots that they will have to pay €15,000 to complete this training if the airline is forced to deal with a trade union over the next five years.

Ryanair has been notified of the complaint and will be invited to attend a hearing at the LRC on the issue. A spokesman for the airline said it was in correspondence with the LRC and would make no further comment.

A number of other pilots at the airline are also believed to be considering a similar claim.

The victimisation complaints have arisen as the airline has begun to offer its senior captains conversion training courses to fly its new Boeing 737-800 aircraft. Earlier this month Ryanair's head of operations, Mr David O'Brien, wrote to these individuals to offer the training course and stated that the offer was conditional upon their "understanding and acceptance" of a number of conditions.

In this letter, seen by The Irish Times, Mr O'Brien states that the training programme will cost €15,000, a sum he said was "modest" in the context of pilots' income, and that Ryanair would write off this debt if they agreed to certain conditions.

The pilots must remain working at Ryanair for five years and he warned that they would have to repay the full training costs if they were represented by a trade union or staff association. "We wish to remind you that should this policy be altered and Ryanair be compelled to engage in collective bargaining with a pilot association or trade union within five years of commencement of your conversion training, you will be liable to repay the full training costs." The letter continues: "Naturally this does not and will not affect your right to freely join any trade union or association of your choice."

Mr O'Brien states that, should the pilots decline this offer, they could be facing redundancy when the existing Boeing 737-200 fleet is phased out in Dublin. They were given seven days to accept the airline's offer or it would immediately lapse. Mr O'Brien signed off by congratulating the pilots on being selected for this training, adding: "We look forward to working with you."

Prior to receipt of this letter, the pilots had attended a meeting with senior Ryanair management where management had outlined a number of "consequences" if they were to opt to be represented by a trade union or association in their dealings with the airline.

According to sources, the consequences included no share options or pay increases, no promotions in Dublin, payment for future recurrent training, the cancellation of staff travel when in uniform, being required to take annual leave in blocks of five days only and possible redundancies. The pilots were told that if the IALPA didn't "go away", the €15,000 conversion training fee would become a mandatory up-front charge.

The victimisation complaint will be heard in private by a rights commissioner who will issue recommendations. This process will go ahead even if Ryanair refuses to attend.

Either party can appeal those recommendations within six weeks to the Labour Court and if upheld the recommendations are binding. Either side can then apply to the Circuit Court to seek the enforcement of the recommendations.

And then this. All in one day

A complaint regarding the alteration of contracts of employment at Ryanair will be moved to the Labour Court.

The complaint, which was initially lodged by the Irish Airline Pilots Association, a division of the IMPACT trade union, at the Labour Relations Commission (LRC) has progressed to the Labour Court, which could issue a binding decision.

The union wants to reach agreement that pilots will be supplied with full particulars of their contract of employment in accordance with the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994. It also wants to ensure that contracts of employment cannot be altered other than by agreement.

This week Ryanair chief executive Mr Michael O\'Leary said he would not let the Labour Court impose conditions on the airline and that he would mount a constitutional challenge to the Act.

Two weeks ago Mr O\'Leary wrote to Mr Declan Morrin, LRC director of advisory services, after it had notified the airline of the complaint. In the letter, seen by The Irish Times, Mr O\'Leary said Ryanair would not participate in the proposed procedure and said IMPACT and IALPA had no basis for making the application.

"We will not allow a trade union, which primarily represents the pilots of our main competitor, to impose effective union recognition through the back door of the Labour Relations Commission, using what is clearly an unconstitutional process," he stated.

Mr O\'Leary warned the LRC that, unless it received confirmation that this "unwarranted and unconstitutional interference" would cease by November 22nd, Ryanair would initiate legal proceedings to challenge the constitutionality of the 2001 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act and its 2004 Amendment.

"This challenge will, when successful, prevent any further interference by trade unions and the Labour Relations Commission in the affairs of high-pay, non-union multinational companies like Ryanair," the letter stated.

Mr O\'Leary said that, if the airline did not receive such confirmation from the LRC, High Court proceedings would follow without further notice. Yesterday, a Ryanair spokesman said its position remained unchanged.

The IALPA case is being taken under the Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004, a measure which emerged from discussions between the social partners on the issue of union recognition.

27th Nov 2004, 22:35
Unreal, is this what the once proud profession of aviation has been degraded too?

27th Nov 2004, 22:43
Every Dog has its day!!

Its about time this very clever arrogant t***er who thinks that he is some kind of "untouchable" gets his due. Its sad to think that he has prob now millions in the bank so quite frankly he doesnt give a sh1t. But this Ryanair bandwagon rollercoaster is going to end, the public are getting more wise as are the authorities.

Orion Man
27th Nov 2004, 23:35
Good old MOL,

He must hate pilots that much it gives him sleepless nights.

28th Nov 2004, 01:11
Whatever one says about MOL, he is a tough so-and-so, and really aviation could do with more like him. OK, I can hear howls of derision coming from all directions. But at least he is straightforward and says what he thinks, and actually, if you can leave the emotion aside, more often than not it makes sense.

He might not like pilots. That is his prerogative. But my guess is that he is very happy with pilots who do what he employed them to do, and he doesn't want them to change the terms of engagement. He doesn{t like them if they try and do that. His position is that if you join Ryanair you join on these terms. If you want a B738 conversion, these are my conditions. Now its up to you.

We still live in a capitalist world, believe it or not, and to survive you have to be prepared to fight for what you believe in. The British have had a lot of bad management in this respect, and that is why we are gradually fading away from just about everything, except shops and financials. I know MOL is not British, but I rather wish he was.

I don't think I will dare read any more posts on this subject, because I can feel I am going to be severely chastised!

28th Nov 2004, 01:38
Low Cost Carriers, LCC Pilots the world over take heed.

Ryan Air and the likes world wide should be supported by pilots worldwide. It is the fragmentation throughout our community that has led to many airlines especially LCC's exploiting pilots by paying significantly lower renumeration.

If we look back in time we will see that pilots payscales have reduced over the years.

Would it not be great to have a worldwide body to negotiate the terms and conditions for pilots globally.

Fight on Paddys.


Global Pilot
28th Nov 2004, 05:41
BluePilot "Every dog has its day" and a good dog (MOL) just might have two.

28th Nov 2004, 06:54
In Ireland, if and when a mangy mutt is killed, e.g. hit by a speeding vehicle ( or maybe even a speeding bullet :E ) would you have to report this to the police ?

Where I'm from plenty of dogs get whacked every day and nobody gives a flying f... !

28th Nov 2004, 08:28
Riverboat:His position is that if you join Ryanair you join on these terms. If you want a B738 conversion, these are my conditions. Now its up to you. Cuts both ways, mate.

I don't suppose that when these guys joined, the cost of moving on to a new type upon redundancy of the old, was part of the contract.

MOL is imposing change without consultation, so why is that OK and the reverse not?

28th Nov 2004, 09:31
Low Cost originated with SWA and was never meant to spawn green-eyed monsters like this Irish cabbie firm.Unfortunately,pilots are prepared to put up with it so he gets away with it.Pilots joining dont even get to meet the CP(maybe they're better off I suppose).Rude bunch of third-raters and Ireland's worst export.

Lionel Hutz
28th Nov 2004, 09:49
Just a little legal note.
Ryanair are threatning to challenge the constitutionality of the relevant labour acts. I don't know where they are getting their legal advice but the general consensus of opinion within the legal profession is that unconstitutionality is the defence of last resort and such a challenge could have unforseen consequences. It would seem to be a very unwise course of action to take.

28th Nov 2004, 10:10
;) ;) Lionel..... with half his work force working on offshore contracts with dodgy agencies therefore avoiding expensive company costs....... I dont think so mate....MOL should lay low in this respect

28th Nov 2004, 10:23
Remember, a few years ago, the FAA barred Frank Lorenzo from involvement in the airline industry. I can't remember what the precise circumstances were, but I believe a contributory factor was that he was - much like O'Leary - a bully with little regard for the disciplines of running an airline. Having someone like that running an airline or involved in the operational side in any way, could have a detrimental effect on safety.

Perhaps a future Irish Air Navigation Act could include a provision permitting the minister to exclude a certain individual from holding an executive or director position with an airline? Of course, I doubt this will happen; I can't see the Irish DoT having the b***s to stand up to O'Leary. They can either fire shots across his bows now - or wait for some unholy catastrophe which is traced back, to any extent, to his management style and the willingness (or lack of it) on the Irish govt's part to provide adequate oversight.

Joyce Tick
28th Nov 2004, 10:56

He may be uncouth and no lover of pilots - but he provides work for scores of them who presumably could not find it elsewhere -or they would they not have left?

And as for "....with little regard for the disciplines of running an airline", surely you just have to be wrong there! If anyone shows discipline in this regard, it is him and that is what hurts you so much, I suspect.

28th Nov 2004, 11:34
Arkroyal: You are right, of course. It should cut both ways. In the end there has to be balance. But it looks to me like MOL is trying to redress the balance from what he considers to be way over the other side, and to do that he has to try and pull it way over to his side, going beyond the balance. (If you see what I mean!)

Personally the e15000 conversion course would not trouble me as much as the commitment to stay 5 years (assuming that actually IS a condition). If I pay for the conversion course, or part of it, I think my commitment should be commensurately reduced - maybe to 2 years. It should cut both ways here, too.

28th Nov 2004, 12:49
How odd that it seems to be acceptable to some that they should buy continuation of their jobs and deny themselves elements of flexibility. It is like being indentured.

If one were self employed then I could imagine that preparing oneself to undertake a contract would be accepatable practice. However, I don't believe that that should apply to employees. Nice work, if as an employer you can get away with it, but I believe that it does abrogate some of an employers responsibilities. Of course it is morally indefensible, but why should that worry MOL?

28th Nov 2004, 16:32
So Riverboat, you'd not only pay for the conversion but take on a bond too? You can come work for a company that I run anytime. Not only can I make money out of you working for me, I can make money out of you too!

A company decides that it is going to change it's fleet, and then gets the employees to pay for it? Is the company's business model not up to scratch? Yes, many are employed by FR but their pay is not theirs, it's a loan... it must be given back to the company in the form of retraining.

People become employees because they want job security and do not want to risk their money on setting up their own business. Others want to take the risk with the prospect of greater returns than taking a job. Here, FR employees have the pleasure of risking their money without the prospect of the returns. The return's are going into MOL's pocket.

Even when I was an unemployed pilot, I baulked at the prospect of paying for "being considered". Boy am I glad...



28th Nov 2004, 17:40
I'm only a PPL but is everybody confident that the Lo Co airlines are going to last another five years? In which case what happens to the up-front payment then?

28th Nov 2004, 17:53
It's bullying and intimidation, plain and simple. The fact that this is taking place in the business world is irrelevant - it is unpleasant and it is unethical.

Most unions are clumsy, inefficient, and not always looking out for their members. They are also the only thing that protects people against a potentially abusive employer.

28th Nov 2004, 19:06
Just when you see behavior that gives trade unions a bad name, you see behavior from management that gives it an even worse name.

One could in theory justify paying for training because it gives the trainee a marketable skill that can be taken elsewhere, but how can one tie any aspect of this to membership in a trade union? That's an outrageous overreach on the part of Ryanair, IMHO


28th Nov 2004, 19:46
Good post i need cider,

I know a lot of the FR pilots and I can tell you for nothing,the moral in FR in DUB anyway is cr*p.

All departments of this airline suffers,from check-in to ops to ramp.They even had the cheek to put a deductuion form in the ramp lads wages for marshalling wands!!!

What a company.

28th Nov 2004, 20:20
Riverboat in your first post on this thread you inferred that it was the pilots who were seeking a change in their contract. This is not the case; it is MOL that is forcing a grossly unfair change on his pilot’s terms of employment.

I hope this latest episode will be the final piece of evidence needed for those pilots who have resisted joining the union to finally realise that without a show of collective strength they will continue to see their terms and conditions sent spiralling down the plughole.

The message has never been clearer……JOIN THE UNION AND FIGHT THE LITTLE FECKER!

28th Nov 2004, 23:33
Thanks scraglad. The rampers paying for the marshalling wands is a joke. But the punchline to the joke is if they lose or misplace the wands which they pay for themselves therefore belong to them, they will be DISCIPLINED ACCORDINGLY.

29th Nov 2004, 02:25
Let us presume for the moment that FR wants to grow into larger aircraft, and leave the 737's aside altogether.

So, they decide on 767's and offer the alternative to pilots...either pay for your rating, or we hire from outside, as there seem to be plenty of folks available, from FR's perspective of course...true or not.

Now, what do you do?
Pay for your conversion, or go elsewhere?

FR has no legal obligation to its pilots to pay for the conversion, and indeed hiring from outside is always presumed to be cheaper...which it most certainly nearly always is.

So, now substitute 767's for 737-700/800/900's and you have more or less the same situation, except of course it may well be a bit more difficult (maybe nearly impossible) to find currently rated pilots.

An interesting scenario...pay up, or quit.
Oh yes, and NO union, thank you very much.

Suspect MOL may well get away with this, unless he is run over by a cement truck.

And, quite frankly, I think I would do the same, considering some of the aggressive comments listed here.

Pay up...or goodbye.
Simply because I could, under Irish employment law, as it presumably stands.

29th Nov 2004, 02:57
To those who feel that Ryan pilots need to pay for their new types- Training is a cost of doing business. That is a necessary part of aviation. If you buy new equipment, presumably because they are more efficient and/or have a greater capacity then you do so because it makes you potentially more profitable. You then have to have crews to fly them;planes don't do well on their own (no matter how much management and nerd engineers would like to think so). Why on earth would you take your most experienced crews and toss them on the street unless you were trying to bust a union? The more experienced the crew, the less training costs will be for the conversion.

Those that would even consider paying for training, especially in the normal course of business are, to put it mildly, fools. If the company was paying for you to learn to fly then you might have a case for a training bond. But this isn't even close. This is a requirement for FR due to a change in fleet and, as such, has been factored into their budget. If these are new aircraft then Boeing is even paying for a certain number of crews per aircraft to be trained. ZERO COST to the company.

Yeah if it looks like dog sh## and smells like dog sh## then I don't have to taste it to know that it is dog sh##, particularly if the dog is standing there, panting.

29th Nov 2004, 03:58
The sad thing about all this is that it is happening - as 411A says - because it can.

This is the way aviation is going, MOL is just the pioneer of these sorts of tactics.

It used to be that pilots were treated like senior execs. The main reason being, apart from their skill, that any one of them could seriously damage an airline by allowing a single lapse in professionalism. Many airlines have gone broke after a single crash.

Treating pilots like this will eventually lower the standards of the profession, and I personally think that it is only a matter of time before a Ryanair pilot, preoccupied with MOL's latest antics, has an accident. That is the inevitable result of raising the stress level in your pilot workforce.

Having said that, everybody has the right to vote with their feet. Ryanair pilots need to either grow some collective courage and take the company on, or accept their lot and quit grumbling.

29th Nov 2004, 08:20
Listen...if you don`t join to a union and work together to invert this situation you all may be sure that things will be even worst.

Do you know how to make new copilots join the unions???

Every leg on a day flight you ask them if they have already joined the union.
If he says no.....he doen`t fly.

If you all do that ,for sure it will work.It did work in my last company.

I don`t know if people is together at Ryanair,but consider a strike mainly to get your respect back.

Remember:Neither you are so weak as you think you are ,nor they are so strong as you think they are.

I wish you good luck,despite I think your situation is very complicated

:yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

29th Nov 2004, 11:54

Every leg on a day flight you ask them if they have already joined the union.
If he says no..... he don't fly

Is that really a valid reason for a Captain to replace an F/O? With that method you are replacing a bullying management with a bullying captain.... Sure fire way to improve moral and CRM.

Surely union membership is a matter of personal choice, or do you want to go back to the good old days of closed shops?

29th Nov 2004, 12:21
Yes sir! I vote for closed shops, bring back Sunday and Wednesday afternoons!!

29th Nov 2004, 14:32
You know that the pilots in question earn more than 130K by all accounts - poor down-trodden souls?

The personal mud-slinging is rather distateful - "tinker" et cetera. Perhaps you would feel more gratified if you hit someone with a placard?

Sometimes I feel sorry for those who do not know what they do.

The other big majors DELL, Microsoft whoever, based in Ireland will not be happy with the implication of binding findings from the Labour Court - how is that constitutional?

In my view business will launch an attack - a concerted and serious attack. They have to.

Saying that a constitutional challenge is the last resort of a scoundrel is simply misleading and foolhardy.

Watch this space.


29th Nov 2004, 14:50
"You know that the pilots in question earn more than 130K by all accounts - poor down-trodden souls"

is that a fact paxman???
and where did u come by those figures ????
mol wants people to believe that everyone in ryanair is on the absolute max money possible ,
if you could find 10 non management people on that money in ryanair i'd say well done and what about all the new F/o's on crap money , do u think they take home 130K ???

get a brain paxman


29th Nov 2004, 15:31
MOL expects his pilots to be a walkover, as in the past they always have been. It is fair to say this is in some part due to the fear factor he manages to instil in his employees, but every pilot who fails to join the union is weakening the position of the whole pilot community.

For Christ sake, stand up for yourselves and your proffesion.

29th Nov 2004, 15:59
It's worth pointing out that anyone who does a little research into the legislation being employed [sic] by IALPA/IMPACT, will already discover rulings / decisions taken on the basis of this Act.

One actually involves a company owned by...wait for it...a US multinational!

Doesn't the argument on "constitutionality" handily deflect any questions on whether one intends or is able to comply with said legislation?

Best of luck to all the FR pilots. Keep on sticking together!

(edited for speling)

Norman Stanley Fletcher
29th Nov 2004, 16:09
I keep thinking of re-joining BALPA when I hear of what is going on in the industry. And then I read comments from people like A-3TWENTY who are just yobs straight from the 70s here in the UK. If I was management and found that an FO had been denied flying rights from a captain because he was not in the union - the captain would be sacked and out the door that afternoon.

Therein lies my dilemna - do I unwittingly support the likes of MOL by not joining the union or do I join and have to put up with the outrageous and totally unacceptable face of union ignorance as exemplified by A-3TWENTY? What a terrible choice!

29th Nov 2004, 16:18

Your saying to the pilots of fr to "stick together", i agree but;

I posted a title called "paying for t/r" and basically i urged all pilots to not pay for their t/r. 90% of the reply's said if its the difference between a flying job,they would pay for it.
If the fr pilots stand up to MOL and his hench men,they are out the door and these 90% WILL pay.

It all boil's down to the refusal of paying for t/r. If we all stand together and refuse,just maybe we might get somewhere.

29th Nov 2004, 16:40
£130K pa excellent, I best go into the office and with a big wheelbarrow for all the pay I have missed in the last few years......

Thanks for the tip Paxman

29th Nov 2004, 16:43
scraglad, If I am correct (which can be quite a rarity), your topic was concerned with pilots willing to pay for an initial type rating, or an initial job with an airline. There have been part-sponsorships, reduced initial payscales and training bonds for "newhires" around for a long time.

What this issue is about is a number of pilots, already employed by the company, being asked to pay for a training course, and being bonded - in extremely vague terms - to the company for the privilege of paying for your training course, and being asked to accept a change in their terms and conditions and above all, be thankful for this golden opportunity (!)

Think about it, if one worked in an office and a new computer system is to be installed for use by the employees, is it reasonable to expect the employees to pay for the required training course just so they get to keep their job? Or is it reasonable to invest in those same employees so that they become more productive as a result of their training and new equipment, driving efficiencies etc etc?

Is the FR scenario considered normal industry practice?

Back to the real issue: IALPA/IMPACT have not made a claim on behalf of FR pilots. There is no threat of industrial action. Why is MOL so reluctant to issue the terms and conditions to all of his pilots (if they are so good?)

Whatever happens, the best plan is for the FR pilots to stay united.

30th Nov 2004, 11:27
In the IT / Telecomms world bonding was considered for some time, due to the high numbers of staff receiving expensive vendor training courses and then leaving to go freelance.

There was a question at the time whether this was legal acording to European employment law, however the majors got around it by creating anti-poaching agreements between each other and the vendors, thus safeguarding their 'investment'

Not being directly involved in aviation I can't comment on the rights and wrongs of FR's policy, however it would seem to mirror what's going on in other, non-aviation, related industries.

30th Nov 2004, 11:37
Yesterday there was another, very balanced article in the Irish Times devoted to this matter which is far too long to reprint and there is no point adding a link as an account is required to read it (and since a lot of you people are up in arms over having to pay for a coffee then I suspect a subscription to the said news paper would be out of the question!).
It boils down effectively to FR’s utter fear of what an organised union could do to it business, and it has an abundance of recent history to fall back on to support its fears. Unions are very prone to been taken over by megalomaniacs with hidden agendas geared ultimately towards their own self interest - (the name Willy from air fungus mean anything to you and didn’t he do well for himself ). Anyone who tries to tell me that union leadership is made up of a bunch of altruistic fellows with exclusively the interests of its members at heart are kidding themselves. Their ‘raison de etre’ is to squeeze the best deal possible without regard to the long term well being of the business and leaqst anyone forget, FR is a business. Where were the senior pilots when the Ryan family had to mortgage everything it owned to keep the business flying – busily feathering their own nest, that’s where. The union needs to demonstrate to the management that it has the long term best interests of the company at heart and not just the pilots. But no, the senior pilots, and its always the senior pilots cause there all right jack and screw the rest, think they have a God given right to fly and by the way, we also make the rules. Well maybe they have, but not with FR – try the hoity toity, jolly hockey sticks handle bar moustached brigade of BA et al if thats what your after. This group, though they cant see it, have helped create an environment that MOL can now exploit to his advantage every single time that this issue comes up. It’s a basic concept of the free market and its called supply and demand. The senior pilots throughout this industry have helped create the environment where hundreds of Wannabees have to, and are prepared to, pay for their own training and put themselves on the market for the highest, or in FR’s case, the lowest bidder. The senior pilots over the years allowed this to happen cause they turned the industry into a closed shop and made it so difficult for people to get in that the inevitable happened – JAR. While they were busy running out of height adjustment in their cockpit caused by the ever increasing thickness of the fat wallets they were sitting on, armies of guys an gals were forking out upwards of 80K of their own dosh to put themselves through training and coming out the other side more than competent to fly an aircraft. So the prospect of having to pay for a Type is second nature. Now they are hungry to work and MOL must think its Christmas every day and you guys helped create it.
By the way, just in case some of you think you can comfort yourselves in the knowledge that I'm a screeming MOL fan well I'm not. (The same thing is going on in many other LCC's but they dont have an excentric media hogging self publisist as a CEO). I am however a fan of what he has created and achieved.

30th Nov 2004, 13:16
"Gin and Tonic please."

"That will be £4.50."

"Ice and lemon?"

"It's six in the evening, they put the ice on the first flight of the day and it's gone/melted by 10am. The Lemon doesn't melt but it's all gone!"

That's the way they look after the pax. The pilots no better!

30th Nov 2004, 14:07
...and it's not just pilots/cabin crew who are being shafted here. You only have to listen to the abuse ground staff get to tell that FR is one hell of a rotten egg to work for. IMHO

http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/monsieurboo/tgv.gif There is light at the end of the tunnel, but http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/monsieurboo/tgv2.gif

30th Nov 2004, 15:00
Butpau - what an interesting post. Are you satisfied with having an industry dragged down to it's lowest level by management that is determined to run an airline like a bus service?

You sound bitter and I will agree that without deregulation there would be far fewer jobs in the industry and these would be taken by the "O" club set from ye olde squadron. But senior pilots generally have to put up with a lot of sh## in a startup airline, low wages, lots of hours, uncertain future, etc. Ryanair almost cratered under the Ryan family until MOL stepped in. Where MOL has failed, however, is by not instilling a corporate culture that is vital in a service industry - a culture of service that treats employees as being as special as customers. If you think I am spouting cheese then read 'Nuts', the story behind Southwest Airlines, the airline FR and others are trying to emulate. Its the people at the airline that make the business run. Herb took care of his people and they have taken his business plan and run with it. MOL and his ilk do not understand this. They worship at the alter of low costs above all and fail to see that you need the revenue generated by happy customers more than you need the ultimate in low costs. FR has a huge CASM advantage over the old line carriers but if they can reduce costs AND keep customers happy then they will win back passengers. And if they can't then someone else who will provide a better service will.

Pilots have always worked for sh## wages, paying their dues instructing, flying freight or charter or even towing banners with the hope that one day they COULD make 130k per year. And for a profession that has more opportunities to have your license taken away each year (checkrides, medicals) than any other profession you need that payoff. You only have so many years to make some money before you are involuntarily retired at age 60. If lawyers and politicians had to do so as well do you think we would have as many restrictions on our profession as we do?

Unions exist because of bad management. A good manager would never have to face the threat of industrial action. Pilots are notoriously poor union members. We have traits of independent thinking and direct action that are essential skills in our jobs. But you come to a point in time where you have no choice but to band together. Ryanair pilots are at that point.

Sorry, couldn\'t resist adding one more post on the importance of employee morale.

The followiing is an article on this subject:

Job stress beginning to take toll on some airline workers
By Barbara De Lollis, USA TODAY
Workers at major airlines are showing signs of strain from salary and benefit cuts, threats to their pensions, demotions, layoffs and bigger workloads. And travelers are starting to pay.

No love lost: Members of the Association of Flight Attendants voice their opinions of the airlines they work for.
By Gene J. Puskar, AP

In the past month, the FBI launched an investigation into whether employees punctured US Airways jets. Strike talk spread among flight attendants at United, US Airways and other carriers. And unusually high numbers of workers sought counseling services.

Psychologists and management experts say a demoralized workforce anxious about their pay, personal lives and job safety doesn\'t bode well for passengers during the busy holiday travel season. That\'s especially true this season, as airlines carry a record number of passengers and lines at security checkpoints lengthen because of tougher requirements.

Stressed-out employees and irritated passengers "create a time bomb for explosive interaction," says Richard Chaifetz, CEO of ComPsych, an employee assistance provider. As of September, ComPsych received about 20% more calls than last year from baggage handlers, flight attendants, pilots and other major airline workers. The uptick — even greater at more-troubled carriers — indicates higher levels of stress, unhappiness and uncertainty, he says.

Even though fliers have come to expect less from their major-airline flight experience since the Sept. 11 attacks, research shows they\'ve noticed a difference this year.

Their No. 1 gripe? Less-courteous flight crews, says Jonathan Barsky of Market Metrix Hospitality Index.

The index, based on surveys of 35,000 fliers, shows satisfaction falling since January, after reaching a two-year high. Similarly, the University of Michigan\'s American Customer Satisfaction Index shows that satisfaction with major carriers fell this year after rising last year.

"Customer satisfaction and financial performance tend to go hand in hand," Barsky says.

The airlines know that and are trying to counter the intense resentment felt by some employees, many of whom have worked 15 or more years for a carrier. Those people, in particular, feel overworked, underpaid, underappreciated and uncertain about their futures, Chaifetz says.

The USA\'s six big traditional carriers will lose an estimated $8 billion this year — more than the $5 billion previously projected — in part because of low-fare competition and record-high jet fuel prices. This month, Continental became the last of the six airlines to seek labor givebacks. The other carriers in the group — American (AMR), United, Delta (DAL), Northwest (NWAC) and US Airways — might not be finished squeezing employees yet.

"You have carriers still in bankruptcy and in precarious financial situations," says airline consultant Dave Emerson of Bain & Co. "There\'s no guarantee there won\'t be more pay cuts and layoffs going forward."

Morale\'s costs

While the bad news continues, some carriers are revamping employee incentive programs and trying to improve communication with workers.

There\'s little dispute that employee morale is "hugely important," says Lee Macenczak, Delta\'s senior vice president of customer service.

"While self-service has grown in popularity, at the end of the day, it is about dealing with people ... and morale definitely plays into that," Macenczak says.

Poor morale has risks. It:

•Hurts productivity. Some employees might not work as hard at a time when 110% effort is needed to diminish airlines\' financial losses. The big airlines are handling about the same number of passengers as they did four years ago when they had as many as 40% more employees. Seriously troubled companies sometimes see a short-term boost in productivity as employees try harder, says Claes Fornell, director of the American Customer Satisfaction Index. But it fades as their sense of determination turns to hopelessness.

•Drives passengers away. "People don\'t feel good about flying an airline where the employees don\'t feel good about working for them," says ComPsych\'s Chaifetz. Employee attitudes become more important as the airlines extend low fares to compete directly with the discounters. When fares are similar, "I\'ll fly the one I feel I get the better experience on," says consultant Tom Knighton of Forum Corp., a Boston-based firm that trains managers and employees how to improve customer service.

Knighton points to Gallup research that shows that when an airline employee "stands out" in a positive way, a flier is 15 times more likely to fly the same carrier.

•Hampers turnaround efforts. Whether inside headquarters or the hangar, these airlines need employees to give their all, says Kevin Mitchell of the Business Travel Coalition. Bad attitudes hurt efforts to improve customer service, which is critical to survival, he says.

Frequent flier Gary Lockhart overheard ticket agents discussing pay cuts, layoffs and low morale as he waited to board a US Airways flight from New York LaGuardia to Pittsburgh earlier this year. Right then, he vowed to switch carriers.

"I wondered if the pilots felt the same way. ... Not exactly a comforting thought," Lockhart says. "Since then, I fly US Air as little as possible."

Michael Steiner, president of New York-based Ovation Corporate Travel, says his business clients are happy with some changes the airlines have made, such as offering more self-service kiosks. But they complain about "the loss of the personal touch."

Delta frequent flier Karen Lamphier dislikes flying mostly because of the security. But Delta\'s staff makes it bearable, she says, citing a recent case of when the VIP lounge staff went out of their way to help during a flight delay.

"The people still make the difference," says the software consultant from Eden, Utah.

Airline employees say that they will continue to do their jobs well, regardless of pay and benefit cuts.

"I don\'t think that any of the flight crews are taking it out on the passengers," says US Airways flight attendant John McCorkle. "They recognize that the customers are just innocent bystanders caught in the middle."

Discounters shine

Statistics compiled by the Department of Transportation show that from January to September, discounters Southwest and JetBlue received among the fewest complaints per 100,000 passengers of 19 airlines ranked. They placed second and third, behind ExpressJet Airlines, a regional carrier that operates Continental Express flights. All the big six carriers placed in the bottom half of the list, with United and US Airways placing 15th and 16th. Results were similar for the same period last year.

Most passengers might not directly feel employees\' frustration unless they overhear grousing in the galley or at the boarding gate, or talk to employees. But it is rippling into the workplace:

• A small number of United mechanics not typically seen by the public regularly sport caps with two large letters — "F" and "U" — and, in small print, "Fly United."

• This month, leaders of the Association of Flight Attendants — the USA\'s biggest flight attendant union — called for an industrywide strike if US Airways, or any other carrier, succeeds in rescinding labor contracts in bankruptcy court. Flight attendants at several airlines, including US Airways and United, are voting on strike authority. Flight attendants at American, the world\'s largest airline, and Southwest say they support the vote.

• The FBI is investigating whether US Airways employees last month punched small holes in the belly of three jets in Charlotte and Orlando. The damage, described as minor exterior damage, was discovered during routine maintenance checks last month, shortly before a bankruptcy court approved 21% temporary pay cuts. The union that represents mechanics and related employees called it "reckless and irresponsible" to speculate on what caused the damage.

• Earlier this month, US Airways had two instances of higher-than-usual sick calls in Philadelphia. The sick calls, along with baggage belt and computer problems, resulted in some flight delays and cancellations, says spokesman David Castelveter. Also in Philadelphia, passengers last month heard a voice on the speaker system say that, because of 21% temporary pay cuts, baggage would arrive up to an hour and a half late, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Incentives at work

As workers try to adjust to the new reality, the major airlines are trying to soften the blow for their remaining workers.

Some, such as American, United and Delta, are creating programs to reward employees for superior performance. Most are also introducing profit-sharing programs. United says its incentive program is already working. The carrier has met its goals as measured by on-time performance and customer intent to fly United again in each of the past three quarters, and has paid out bonuses, says United spokeswoman Jean Medina.

But until the airlines turn losses into profits, employees can\'t count on profit sharing for bigger paychecks.

US Airways is widely considered to have the worst morale problem of its peers. It has gone to its union-represented employees for two rounds of concessions and is negotiating a third round now with mechanics, flight attendants and customer-service agents. If deals aren\'t reached, it will begin making its case Thursday in bankruptcy court to void the contracts.

To prevent sick calls during the hectic holiday period, CEO Bruce Lakefield said, the airline reinstated an incentive program that it can afford. Employees with perfect attendance through early January, and those who work peak days, will earn US Airways tickets and the chance to enter a lottery for freebies donated by vendors, such as game tickets for the NFL\'s Philadelphia Eagles and NBA\'s Charlotte Bobcats, he says.

"We\'d like to get all this behind us," Lakefield says. "When people have futures, they feel much better about morale and their personal lives."

30th Nov 2004, 18:01
Cactusbusdrvr – The only thing I can see wrong with running an airline like a bus service is if you advertise it as something else. At no stage does FR or some of the other LCC’s try and sell you anything other than a shuttle service from A to B. If you want it, buy a ticket if you don’t, feel free to go elsewhere. If you cant be arsed to feed yourself before you get on board for your typical one or two hour flight, then be prepared to pay silly money for food and drink when you get on board. Its interesting though that people are voting with their credit cards and not their feet. It’s the same for employees – FR is unashamedly a non-union multi national company the same as Dell and HP and if you go to work for them then you already know what to expect. That is not to say that you have no rights cause you have. Every employee is protected by local and European employment law and can use the courts if necessary to invoke them. Some might say that that’s precisely what’s going on at FR now. If the management at FR are abusing their authority, they will be dealt with and I hope they get everything they deserve.

I’m not bitter cause I’m far too young and also have a lot more to worry about like how to service my loans. I completely accept the points you make about how employees are treated, especially pilots who have forked out so much of their own dosh only to find that they have to do it on a continuous basis. They are prodded and poked every 12 months or more and, because of the high divorce rates in the industry, have to keep current on everything from a washing machine to a 737. But I don’t see many posts from this category of pilot complaining that the industry owes them a living. All I see are the same old whinges from the pampered brigade who are now trying to circle the wagons as their cartel is being endangered – the laugh is that they are now trying to fend off the challenge from the sector they helped create.

I also totally disagree that unions exist because of bad management. There are tons of examples where unions co exist with management and the results are usually good. Our own Celtic Tiger owes a huge amount to the cooperation of the unions. The turn around in Aer Lingus was brought about exclusively through the cooperation of the unions and it must pain them now to see they are given very little credit for it. You can have all the business plans in the world, copied from as many successful business models as you like, but without cooperation from the work force you may as well fill the paper dispensers in the loo with it. Which takes me neatly back to FR. To keep their costs down they must be able to project their fixed costs as far ahead as possible. Commercial airlines are kept in the air by the laws and principles of economics, NOT aerodynamics. The industry has given receivers enough work for the rest of their lives, mopping up after those who thought it was the other way around.

Your addition to your post on the morale and stress amongst employees can be attributed to almost any industry and not just an airline. But I think it is somewhat simplistic to categorise LCC’s as being part of the traditional Service Industry cause there not. Try telling the hostie that you will take your business across the street at 35000 feet. Or try telling the ticket agent that you will go elsewhere when there is only one carrier on the route you wish to travel on. Its not really the service industry is it, and in many ways that’s why they can get away with a lower lever of service than one might other wise expect . The article alludes to it briefly but I think the industry has ambushed 9/11 to justify this. Many many hotels have suffered terrorist attacks over the years resulting in the loss of life and hotels are in the service industry – when was the last time you had to walk through the front door scanner in your Y fronts. There was a time when you were asked at check in “....and where are you going today sir”. The sarcastic reply of “ … the same place as my luggage please”, used to solicit at least a fake smile (as if they haven’t heard that gag before). But now, the big red button is pushed and you are carted off for a free rectal exam. Don’t blame the LCC’s on this phenomenon. They big carriers are more than happy to use this to drive down their own standards that they know they cant maintain and remain competitive. You reap what you sow.

30th Nov 2004, 19:08

While I don't share your view totally, I'd like to commend you on an excellently argued and written post.

What Ryanair have done is bring the competition more into line on pricing ... thankfully not on service provision (yet). Having been a frequent user of Ryanair's services for a number of years, I've had enough of clapped out seats, filthy interiors and sullen 'service'. I don't even bother checking their website anymore, secure in the knowledge that reasonable fares are available elsewhere. Even within my immediate environment, I'm not alone in having taken this 'market driven' decision.


Big Tudor
30th Nov 2004, 19:30
Michael Steiner, president of New York-based Ovation Corporate Travel, says his business clients are happy with some changes the airlines have made, such as offering more self-service kiosks. But they complain about "the loss of the personal touch."
And yet the travelling public will still buy the cheapest ticket available, irrespective of the level of customer service on board. This also goes for most things in life, people like to think they are getting something for nothing. Unfortunately in aviation you get nothing for nothing, it all has to be paid for somehow. Law prevents airlines outsourcing their staff requirements to low labour cost countries such as Indonesia or India (for now).
It is interesting to note that the cost of a flight ticket from LHR-JFK isn't much more than Laker was offering in the '70s. Have costs really not increased in over 20 years, or are we seeing the Aircrew lifestyle package being dragged into line with the revenue.

Can I just add that, irrespective of a persons viewpoint on the subject, this thread contains some of the best debate I have seen on Pprune in a long time. Thank you gentlemen / ladies for maintaining the high standards this BB is reknowned for.

Big Tudor
30th Nov 2004, 20:22
Cos like it or not, Ryanair are being blatantly open and cold heartedly ruthless about what they are doing. Unfortunately a lot of airlines are trying to align themselves with FR but are tied by long standing union agreements. FR are trying to avoid unions so they themselves can dictate the terms and conditions.

Flying is no longer the reserve of the wealthy. As a result the terms and conditions of the employees cannot remain at the level they were when travelling by air had to be done in a jacket and tie.
Likewise the mystique and elitism of pilot life has been eroded over the years. Long gone are the days when only the well connected in society were admitted for pilot training. How many posts have we seen on Pprune about pilots accepting jobs on low salaries (or flying for no salary)? Pilots are now classed as mere employees, like it or not, and advancing technology on the flight deck has removed a lot of the responsibilties of flying.
Pilots have 2 choices to make. Either accept that the occupation is not of the same standing as it once was and accept reduced T&C's as a result, or fight to retain the standing. It must be accepted though that in order to retain the profession in it's historical form, the cost for travelling by air must reflect the cost of employing the workforce. This will inevitably lead to reduction in capacity, either by shrinkage or removal of airlines.

30th Nov 2004, 21:48
Hi all
so the FR ramp guys have to buy their own safety equipment?? No wonder so many of them have no ear defenders on the Dublin ramp. I thought it was the employers' responsibility to provide safety apparel. Guess MoL must have missed that bit in Business school.Can't wait to see his ass in court when a newly-deafened rampie sues him for loss of hearing, like the Army deafness claims of times past....What's that I read lately about MoL sticking four -800s into Liverpool at an alleged cost of 60 million per aircraft. Funny that! I could have sworn he'd bought them for 30 mill apiece and flogged them to the Royal bank of Scotland for 48M apiece.Must have only been a rumour then.
15 grand is peanuts to Ryanair. This is about control and nothing to do with money....Is East Midlands Training the "fifth" approved FTO or is that just another rumour??

30th Nov 2004, 22:53

you say 15 grand a piece is peanuts to fr, times that by the amount of pilots and its a fortune.

I know a rampie that worked for fr,he was towing the eircell a/c which is now grounded,out of a hanger.When they disconnected the tug,the a/c rolled towards him and nearly crushed him to death because the engineers had removed the park brakes.

The a/c rolled towards a british airways 737 parked on stand ready to push. Only for him and the tug driver,the fr a/c would have reared the ba. They both threw chocks under the wheels of a moving out of control a/c.

They both reported the incident to management and the usual outcome...........WE DONT GIVE A SH*T.!!

A couple of days later it appeared in the newspaper and the only person to praise these two lads was the journalist.

"What's your point" i hear you all cry,i'll tell you;

They got away with it,as long as fr opperate,they will get away with murder or in this case,near murder.

Never again,in any shape or form would i ever work for fr again, i would rather starve than put up with the abuse they dish out,they are the most ungrateful,mean,and abusive people on the face of this earth,and i'm being nice.

the grim repa
30th Nov 2004, 23:31
not as much as it is now and is going to cost them in excess fuel burns in the future,

1st Dec 2004, 06:13
Big Tudor

Small point of order- and advancing technology on the flight deck has removed a lot of the responsibilties of flying

No it hasn't. If anything responsibility has increased over the years , but authority has been eroded!!!

Still I would not want the thread to creep, so back on subject......

Joyce Tick
1st Dec 2004, 07:47

I agree, it's not the responsibilities that have been reduced - more the skills required, that's why we don't earn as much respect. I mean, just about anyone can operate an Airbus, for example (it was carefully designed that way, wasn't it?)

1st Dec 2004, 11:31
Hi Scraglad
In real terms, 15 grand X number of -200 pilots is not a lot. Maybe two or three million. Ryanair can certainly afford it. There is probably some mechanism where they can write off the cost of pilot training against tax. This is about power and control and bringing the fight to the pilots. As someone has already said, the cost of training the pilots is built into the cost of the aircraft and can probably be written off.I'm sure any accountant on these pages can enlighten us all...if Ryanair charge you 30plus grand to get a Type, how can they do it for 15 grand? Not to mention the disruption to the schedule when you take pilots offline to hit the books/sim for a month or so....this is the usual disinformation and lies from FR. It's purely to break the back of any organised resistance. Surely, these guys on the 200s have the tightest contracts out of all the FR pilots and MoL's side are trying to break their contracts from within. Any competent contracts lawyer would send MoL packing.

stormin norman
1st Dec 2004, 17:46
Its a fact of life every airline has a fall now and then.
It will be interesting how the public react when Ryanair
has theirs.

Will the can of worms be opened by the authorities on poor
pay,rock bottom moral,minimal maintenance and training etc etc.

We will have to wait and see, but i for one wouldn't touch them with a rusty bargepole.

2nd Dec 2004, 09:18
I worked for Ryanair on the ramp for a while.
The front line and ramp staff themselves are the best bunch of hardworking folks you could ever meet. Everyone of us on the ramp worked like dogs every day.
The management however !! The impression we got from management was that we were lazy layabout scum. The memos winging their way up from the frequent cost saving meetings in the glorified HQ called the "Whitehouse" complaining of our attitude and lack of professionalism made that abundantly clear.

We actually had our toilets locked for approx 5 days due to the "immature" graffitti written inside. This required all rampers to walk out onto the ramp and back up into the terminal building for a p*ss for Gods sake!!! Find me any company toilet devoid of graffitti anywhere in the world. I, like most people, think its silly to write graffitti in toilets but should I be denied use of facilities because its there?

It wasnt unusual to do four or five 25 minute turnarounds back to back, and by that I mean as you push one aircraft back another is taxiing in, in total we'd do about 9 aircraft a day, sometimes up to 11 per day. Shattering rock breaking hard work every day for a little more than minimum wage.

Then there was the late shift...most of the guys finished at 10.30. There was always only 5 lads scheduled after this time. About 7 aircraft land in a 25 minute slot around 11.00 pm in Dub. Take away one guy to do toilets, one to do water and that leaves 3 lads to deal with 7 aircraft in a 25 minute time frame!! Madness, unsafe, ridiculous nightmare every night 364 times a year.

Ryanair training however stated that 2 guys were required for water and 2 for toilet servicing, however that would leave one guy to deal with 7 aircraft !!! and herein lies the crux. If you damage an aircraft while doing toilets/water (which has happened due to the hazards of reversing the trucks at night with no one to guide you) Ryanair ask you where your second man was and "Hey didnt we tell you in training its a 2 man job". However if on the night you insist on a second man youre told to get real and do the job or else...hence theyre covered on all fronts.

This "real world versus training world" difference is rampant in Ryanair. The ground equipment in Ryanair Dub is diabolical. To make all the equipment the ground staff use 100% safe would cost a fortune. Theyre willing to keep letting accidents happen as a result of bad equipment as its the cheaper option.

I know there are some court cases coming up regarding ex-ramp staff but as usual im sure these will be settled on the court steps much to Ryanairs delight. Someday I hope someone will take them all the way inside.

I only saw operations from my lowly position but if this mentality exists in other departments its only a matter of time before something serious happens. I hate saying that but alas its what I believe, having experienced first hand this companys attitude towards its workers.

2nd Dec 2004, 18:20
Link to the relevant victimization legislation as mentioned on Page 1 if interested.

Pages 5, 6 I believe refers


2nd Dec 2004, 20:16
It really doesn't seem a very clever way to run an airline. Somebody once said that a Company gets the Union it deserves. A good employer really shouldn't worry about pilots joining a union; although he might ask why they think it is necessary.

2nd Dec 2004, 20:19
Quote......... This "real world versus training world" difference is rampant in Ryanair. The ground equipment in Ryanair Dub is diabolical. To make all the equipment the ground staff use 100% safe would cost a fortune. Theyre willing to keep letting accidents happen as a result of bad equipment as its the cheaper option

Aint it the truth teroc. The famous investigation meeting has to be the best. When you have a accident on the ramp you write a report you are then called in to the said meeting. Questioned on what happened, then two or three days later you are told what they think happened always the fault of the rampie. Then you are given a written warning and thats it no come back no legal help is allowed only a workmate may come with you to the meeting. WHY DO WE WORK THERE you may ask, once it was a good place to work, but now with crap equipment thats is a danger to everybody in or around it, it's damned if you do damned if you don't

2nd Dec 2004, 22:42
You are all deluding yourselves folks
every last one of ya.
It will never change ever
nobody will stand up to them
Fianna Fail
Dept. transport
no one
Aer lingus now copy them
Aer Arran now copy them
Citijet... easyjet... jet blue...
I'm boring myself
there is none!!

3rd Dec 2004, 04:46
...the latest from ATWonline says Ryanair is on a roll, and no apparent shortage of pilots on the horizon either.

<<<Ryanair CEO Michael O'Leary, speaking at the Future of Air Transport Conference in London, said Europe and Ryanair are nowhere close to reaching the saturation point of LCC service. He said that in 10 years when Ryanair's passenger load gets to 100 million a year, "we'll be straining around the edges." Confident of Ryanair's low costs, O'Leary said that if oil gets to $60 a barrel, "we'll be the only profitable airline in Europe. If it gets to $70 a barrel, we'll be the only breakeven airline in Europe and probably the only airline in Europe." He added that the entire Ryanair fleet will be equipped with inflight entertainment systems by next March or April.
Separately, Ryanair said it carried 2.197 million passengers in Nov., up 10% on the year-ago period. Load factor lost 1 point to 82%. For the rolling 12 months ended Nov. 30, passenger numbers totaled 26.4 million and load factor averaged 83%. The carrier said 30,000 Volare passengers stranded after the Italian airline's collapse have taken up Ryanair's offer of free tickets on its international routes. It also said it will host an open recruitment day Dec. 9 in Venice, Volare’s main base, for Volare pilots.>>>

Think the guys had better pony up 'd cash for training, pronto.

3rd Dec 2004, 07:52
Ryanair carried less pax in november than oct.
this is normal as there is 1 less day.
what is not normal is the fall to be about 11%.
If there numbers are true they have reduced capacity to keep the load factors up. I would have expected capacity to rise as they have more 738s.

3rd Dec 2004, 10:13
I agree 'cider',

Those investigation meetings are a joke. You can hear them building the gallows long before you attend. No matter what argument you put the result is always the same.....

....."We find you, the patsy, responsible. Say thank you to your intellectual superiors, toddle off with your smacked arse and we'll say no more..till it happens again and again and again....."

The investigation will always find the ground handler at fault as to say otherwise will be to admit culpability which will require further investigation, perhaps with outside third parties, ultimately resulting in much needed changes to procedures and practice and a financial investment in equipment and training.

Im not saying that the ground handlers havent been responsible for some incidents, they certainly have, but to say 100% of all incidents are due to them is at best incorrect and at worst a cover up.

5th Dec 2004, 08:13
411A, whilst I note your point and usually acknowledge your experience within the industry from earlier days, on this occasion things are not quite as simple as you would seem to think.

The basic fact is that all the unfortunate employees want is for Mo'L to behave like a civilised person and not some Victorian mill-owner. If he would listen to the employees' concerns, he could have a loyal, hard-working workforce which would neither need nor want union representation.

But sadly he won't listen. As a result, union activity has had to be initiated in order to use employment legislation to protect the workforce from unreasonable terms and conditions.

It won't affect me personally as I will never fly RyanAir whilst arrogant bullies are at the helm of the company. A management style more like that of a Southern State cotton plantation owner at the time of the American civil war is totally unacceptable in today's society.

To misquote Clark Gable's Rhett Butler, "Frankly, my dear 411A, he don't give a damn!"

Another Rhett Butler line must have been written with Mo'L in mind: "With enough courage, you can do without a reputation."

5th Dec 2004, 15:35
Would certainly agree, BEagle, that if Ryanair management (such as it is...:yuk:) were just slightly more accomodating, their staff (including FD) would be more co-operative.

At some point however, IF the management 'style' doesn't change, financial folks will have a look at the company, and decide for themselves the present unviability of the situation, and it well could be that the 'financial cement truck' will right and truly find the present top guy in the head shed....if you get my drift.

In the meantime, folks now employed have several choices...keep their collective heads down and hope for the best (cement truck), or organize, and put their heads on the chopping block.

Not an easy choice...either way. But, the added rating (and line experience) would certainly go a long way if they decide to jump ship.

5th Dec 2004, 16:27
411A:In the meantime, folks now employed have several choices...keep their collective heads down and hope for the best (cement truck), or organize, and put their heads on the chopping block. Not quite. If they keeop their heads down, roll over and take more of the same, no-one's gonna call for the cement truck.

By organising, they're as likely to put MOL's head (Oh! Perlease:O ) on the chopping block, as their own.

Understand, please, that the erosion of Ts and Cs at Ryanair are percolating through the Locos of the British Isles. At least one other is about to get a bloody nose from its pilots, and (sad to say) it's the only way that the rot will be stopped.

And if you think fifteen grand is a good rate for upgrading from the 200 to the NG, then please let us know why.

It's robbery, as is not being paid during training, not being kept in medical cat by the company, and the many other things which RYR deprive their flight deck of.

You wouldn't have put up with it in your day, and there's no reason why anyone should now.

The Tolpuddle Martyrs didn't set up a union to bring down their employers. They did it as a last desperate measure to feed themselves.

Good companies' (and there are many) employees don't need a union. Ryanair's do.

5th Dec 2004, 20:27
Quite correct, Arkroyal, I most definately would not have put up with this nonsense, but then again, I'd be darn sure I had the rating and operating experience, then done something about it.

To huff and puff (collectively or individually) is a waste of time, BEFORE you have the boss over a barrel, and then find that he can't hire guys, because the type is relatively new....and just where is he going to get current crews then?

THINK, before acting, and then have him by the short hairs...right where he belongs, by the looks of it.

Much easier to get folks to comply with honey...than with vinegar...sad to say...and some managements right and truly have forgotten that all important fact.