View Full Version : Ireland: Ryanair Fears €20m Pilot Hit
BEagle
2nd Jan 2007, 15:02
From the Sunday Times, 31 Dec 2006. (Note for Mods - the ST's direct URL link may not be available to people outside the UK, hence the article is reproduced in full below) :
"Ireland: Ryanair fears €20m pilot hit
Brian Carey
LOW-FARE airline Ryanair faces sanctions and damages in excess of €20m if it loses a series of cases to be taken by Irish pilots and due to be decided in the coming year. The decision could also see future pay claims adjudicated by the Labour Court rather than the airline.
The key date for the airline is January 31 when the Irish supreme court will rule whether the Labour Court and the Labour Relations Commission have jurisdiction over industrial disputes at the airline. If the Supreme Court rules in favour of the pilots, it will lead the way to a string of grievances being adjudicated.
A total of 100 pilots have lodged victimisation claims against the airline through the state industrial relations machinery. The airline faces sanctions of up to twice the annual salary of the pilots in each case if the claims are proven. Ryanair says that its pilots earn at least €100,000 per annum.
The airline is also facing a separate series of High Court actions from 64 pilots who claim that their constitutional rights were infringed by a controversial training bond.
The airline agreed to pay the cost of retraining pilots on new Boeing aircraft at a cost of €15,000 but only if the pilots signed a bond agreeing not to leave the airline for five years. The bond also stipulated that the pilots would have to repay the training costs if the company was forced to negotiate with any trade union during the same period.
The pilots claim the terms of the bond infringe their constitutional rights, particularly the right to freedom of association and the right to allow trade unions to negotiate on their behalf.
In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Ryanair estimates that damages could total €6m if the pilots are successful.
A supreme court ruling in favour of the pilots in January could also result in the Labour Court deciding on compensation and working conditions for Ryanair pilots. It would mean Ryanair’s system of payment would be open to scrutiny by a third party for the first time.
Ryanair has consistently maintained that its pilots’ pay is among the highest of all short-haul airlines, but a large chunk of salaries is paid through productivity and incentive bonuses. Ryanair’s SEC filing says some 42% of a pilot’s salary is payable through bonuses.
The filing also says the airline agreed to a basic salary increase of 1.8% for pilots at 13 of its bases last April. Pilots at Dublin “chose not to participate in these negotiations and as a result received no pay increase”. Pilots who were part of a 2000 share option plan were eligible to earn €60,000 before tax from December 1, 2005, the filing says, “and generally did so”."
Whilst I appreciate that it might be illegal to victimise somebody for being a member of a union he has worded this very carefully I am sure.
The bond also stipulated that the pilots would have to repay the training costs if the company was forced to negotiate with any trade union during the same period.
Now I am no lawyer but he doesn't mention "membership" and I am sure specifically so.
It is a brilliant divide and rule tactic, the Union really wants to negotiate but is going to be encouraged not to by its own members.
I am sure that if you were to put as much money and effort into treating your staff properly then you would end up with happy staff, the same business with the same profits, maybe even improved profits.
What can somebody's motivation be to make life such a misery for so many people when it doesn't have to be that way?
Alpine Flyer
2nd Jan 2007, 22:40
It is a brilliant divide and rule tactic, the Union really wants to negotiate but is going to be encouraged not to by its own members.
It is not so much a brilliant tactic as a circumvention of the law. It is a union's primary raison d'etre to negotiate on behalf of its members. If an employment contract penalizes employees in case a/their union does what it is supposed to do, the contract infringes on the right of association and the right to have a union negotiate on one's behalf.
I have no doubt that the Irish judicial system will be able to discern such a circumenvention and I suppose that a contractual clause the sole purpose of which is to circumvent the letter (or even spirit) of the law will not hold in court.
TheOne83
2nd Jan 2007, 22:40
Wow :eek:
i don't like this stuff, specially now that i'm in my way to start ATPL :* looks like everything is up side down..
In another blow for the Hairy Camel, Ryanair's cynical attempt to gain control of the domain name for a customer's critical website was rejected by a UN Panel on Wednesday:
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/technology/061227/z122706A.html
Alpine
the sole purpose of which is to circumvent the letter (or even spirit) of the law will not hold in court.
You have a lot more faith in the law than I have then, because I would have thought that the court would hold to the "letter" and not "spirit" of the law.
But I dearly hope that you are right.
Faire d'income
3rd Jan 2007, 02:12
Ryanair says that its pilots earn at least €100,000 per annum.
Watch them alter that statement very quickly if the Labour Court rule against them.
Still with the IAA validating the licenses of every primate that can sign a form he won't have any problems when he forces the others to leave. Unless of course the incidents don't end with Rome and Knock.
Ryanair says that its pilots earn at least €100,000 per annum
Now that is an interesting fact, according to Ryanair the starting salary is €100,000, or is the the usual case of saying one thing and meaning another.
curser
3rd Jan 2007, 09:34
Thank you Beagle for posting this great news. Well done Evan (and the lads for sticking by him). You guys have made my new year a good deal more cheery. Theone83, I should'nt get too worried, the lads are ensuring you have a job worth the money you are spending on your ticket. Role on 2007 lets watch the camel squerm.:D
RYR-738-JOCKEY
3rd Jan 2007, 09:51
I just can't wait to hear the verdict.
RogerIrrelevant69
3rd Jan 2007, 10:07
Back in the heyday of Ryanair related threads we could expect long sanctimonious threads from a certain pro-Ryanair contributor we all loved to hate. His posts were a joy to behold quoting everything from Homer to Shakespeare to Yeats as was his wont. For some they were a touch verbose but useful to others suffering insomnia. Some detected threats within these wordy feasts, others were often left open mouthed by the man's audacity and verbal gymnastics.
Noted defeats in the Supreme Court of Ireland were turned into outright victories. What some judges described as intimidation and bullying were dismissed as a strong robust management style. Aer Lingus was regularly dismissed as a worthless organisation run by the communists in SIPTU and the dopes in government. So worthless was Aer Lingus, that almost all of Ryanair's family silver was to be spent buying this useless pile of pooh. And then...silence. Cue tumbleweed. Nothing at all. And so now no more do we receive the wisdom we so badly want to read from the parallel universe of Ryanair. Ah those happy days are gone indeed.
Anyway for now let's look forward to lots of dirty laundry being aired in this next court case - but don't count your chickens just yet!
cameldung
3rd Jan 2007, 10:57
All of which explains why a CONDITION for promotion in Ryanair is that each applicant must sign a document confirming "that they have no outstanding claims" against the company.
Thus, as night follows day, it follows those who don't sign don't get promoted. But, to paraphrase another famous Ryanair communication to its pilots "this is not victimisation or intimidation, nor does it in any way infringe your legal rights". Yea, right.
Make no mistake about this bunch. They remain as deadly as ever.
CamelhAir
3rd Jan 2007, 11:23
i don't like this stuff, specially now that i'm in my way to start ATPL looks like everything is up side down..
Please explain why, as a potential future pilot, you would rather the status quo remains? If your attitude is all love of MOL, I, for one, would rather you stayed the hell out of aviation and left those of us who have an interest in bettering ourselves to get on with it.
Bearcat
3rd Jan 2007, 12:21
I think the FR model of pilot recriutment and working condts has been on the rack for a long time....should this claim bear fruit I believe the FR share price maybe affected......more important though would be a historic victory for those involved who genuinely stuck by their guns for genuine greivances.:D
Usually at this juncture our old pal usually marches into town firing blanks in all directions......:=
ChocksAwayUK
3rd Jan 2007, 12:26
Please explain why, as a potential future pilot, you would rather the status quo remains? If your attitude is all love of MOL, I, for one, would rather you stayed the hell out of aviation and left those of us who have an interest in bettering ourselves to get on with it.
Ooh, calm down. I politely suggest that it might indeed be the "status quo" at Ryanair that young TheOne83 objects to rather than the pilot's attempts at resolution. Not sure of course but can you really imagine any pilot being "all love for MOL"?
Anyway, best of luck to the pilot's involved.
CamelhAir
3rd Jan 2007, 12:57
ChocksAwayUK
Hard as it is to believe, there are (or were at any rate) some pilots who did indeed love MOL. The culprits include the usual goons such as SMcK, AO'S etc etc. No surprises there then.
However, there were (and the odd few still seem to persist) plenty of, mainly younger, Scandi, German and Dutch pilots who thought MOL was a superstar and would more gladly bend over at his beck and call. Am I making this up? Well, what do you think of pilots who asked MOL for his autograph???? This I have witnessed with my own eyes. I truly hope these individuals now see the light. Roll on the 31st.
ChocksAwayUK
3rd Jan 2007, 13:02
Well I never, roll on indeed.
RogerIrrelevant69
3rd Jan 2007, 13:46
What do you think of pilots who asked MOL for his autograph????
Yeeks CamelhAir you actually made my flesh crawl there for a moment :yuk:
I hope there are not too many brown nosed pups like that in FR, otherwise progress will be well nigh impossible.
Was a passenger on a flight when a man sat next to me showing his boarding card which had been signed by mol. Felt so sorry for this man who was obviously chuffed to bits with the autograph. If only he knew what the bloke was really like
angryblackman
3rd Jan 2007, 23:57
I quess Ryan Air will be forced to relocate to Canada and hire Canadians to fly, ince the europeans are stiring up trouble again.
Why can't you guys just be happy your flying for peanuts and have a job.
I love flying so much that I'D FLY FOR FREE!
Lon More
4th Jan 2007, 04:04
I'D FLY FOR FREE MOL would probably love to have you. Apply here (http://www.ryanair.com/site/EN/about.php?sec=careers&ref=10002) Unfortunately most have things like mortgages, loans etc. to repay. The ocasional meal and tank of fuel to get to work is a nice bonus.
From same website, applications for a new General Operations Managerairline experience is not a prerequisite.:confused:
Harrier46
4th Jan 2007, 05:02
Was a passenger on a flight when a man sat next to me showing his boarding card which had been signed by mol. Felt so sorry for this man who was obviously chuffed to bits with the autograph. If only he knew what the bloke was really like
You mean rich, successful, and boss of a large and profitable company, carrying millions of passengers each year?
If you sign a contract you agree to the conditions, if you do not like it go elsewhere. Simple!
MOL would probably love to have you. Apply here Unfortunately most have things like mortgages, loans etc. to repay. The ocasional meal and tank of fuel to get to work is a nice bonus.
Oh dear, have yet to meet a RYR pilot who comes to work on a bus, looking undernourished, and scruffy from sleeping rough (no home). I think a reality check is needed here!;)
cameldung
4th Jan 2007, 06:59
have yet to meet a RYR pilot who comes to work on a bus, looking undernourished, and scruffy from sleeping rough (no home).
Clear proof that you don't know where to look. It may sound like a smart comment to you, but you clearly are not at all up to speed on the facts. Incidentally, somebody who might sleep in a car would not be likely to use public transport, nor somebody who slept in an airport.
I think a reality check is needed here!
Where do you get your reality from? This is yet more proof that talk is cheap and reflects the attitudes of the poster more than reality. And speaking of attitudes, what a response to somebody who merely pointed out why flying for nothing is not feasible for most ordinary people. (Love the bit ending "simple!" - again betraying mind-boggling lack of knowledge of how the Ryanair employment system works).
angryblackman,
"I love flying so much that I'D FLY FOR FREE!"
I think you'll have to. Can't see anyone wanting you.:D
radeng
4th Jan 2007, 09:45
As a rather naive SLF, €100k doesn't sound that brilliant to me for a captain, especially on relatively short haul intensive rosters. An engineering manager in semiconductor design can make that - in the UK, too. That job is a lot less stressful!
CPL_Ace
4th Jan 2007, 09:47
I'D FLY FOR FREE!
Assuming that you haven't been forced to splash out on a RYR TR or Line training (with no garuntee of the job - see Wannabes forum - there are folk there panicking about getting their first job to cover the massive loan they took out for fATPL who still wouldn't touch them)
Still as long as some do........:uhoh:
Is it true that pilots pay for their own uniforms there?
RogerIrrelevant69
4th Jan 2007, 09:59
grim repa,
I have to agree whole heartedly.
It's a bit of nonsense trying to make out there is not case to answer at this stage. This case is about to hit the supreme court (that is the highest in Ireland). The pilots, the Labour court and Ryanair all recognise this is not a trivial issue.
A quick search of pprune (and in particular a bunch of threads scroogs has pointed to in the past) will confirm that life is not all roses in Ryanair regardless of what contract was available on the week a new recruit decided to sign up. And after signing on the dotted line, the goal posts and rules appear to move rather quickly.
From knowing a few rookie pilots in Ryanair, I know conditions are a long way from great. One told me if you want to fly and do nothing else for a few years great but forget about everything else - including pay - he was on peanuts. Other stories were more colourful and some have appeared in one form or another here on pprune.
As for our chum angryblackman - I can only assume his FLY FOR FREE is just a wind-up, that or he is very rich and/or stupid indeed.
Bearcat
4th Jan 2007, 11:51
angryblackman = total wind up
captplaystation
4th Jan 2007, 17:56
Harrier46,( must be ex Air Force right ?) with the greatest of respect you are talking out of your arse. What first hand knowledge do you have of how much our new F/O's earn ? Perhaps rather more pertinent is how much disposable income they have(n't got ) once they pay back the loan for their licence rating etc, and then find themselves rostered at a different base each week(if they are the lucky? one's actually doing some flights) because nobody could actually get around to allocating them a base, forced to spend their meagre income on hotel food , airport sarnies, or in extreme cases relying on handouts from the Capt as they have NO MONEY. The stories about some new guys sleeping in cars and terminals are NOT stories, they are FACT. So ( assuming you are ex AIR FARCE. . .no not a spelling error) be grateful that the good old UK stumped up for your training and stop trying to cast doubts on the situation some of my colleagues have to endure, as you plainly know cack all about which you pontificate.
HundredPercentPlease
4th Jan 2007, 18:53
Oh dear, have yet to meet a RYR pilot who comes to work on a bus, looking undernourished, and scruffy from sleeping rough (no home). I think a reality check is needed here!;)
Odd comment. I was offered a job at FR a few years ago. I was in debt to the tune of about £60,000, and Ryanair wanted another £18,000 (IIRC) out of me. Their kind offer was £10,000 pa plus half sector pay. So I phone the only bloke I knew at Ryanair, and he was shacked up with a load of other FO's in a tiny flat in Germany, on a salary of £0. He was waiting to complete his line training (hence no income) and was borrowing money furiously to scrape by.
I felt I had enough poverty already, and declined their offer of further. Never looked back.
TolTol
4th Jan 2007, 22:25
Will the outcome of this court case have any bearing on low houred cadets working for Ryanair?
b17heavy
4th Jan 2007, 22:51
I would hope that Ryanair get taken to the cleaners in court. Have dealt with some of these comedians and they really do deserve to loose. It seems they care for nothing apart from €. Don’t like the way they do business and I also don’t buy “its your fault you signed the contract” argument.
Harrier46 – I assume you are winding people up ? If not – what a wonderful way to see the world, if only things were so easy….
Ryanair says that its pilots earn at least €100,000per annum.
I cannot see what you are all complaining about. Anyone in this industry who starts as a new entry pilot on €100,000 is in clover.
Or is the Ryanair spokesman telling an untruth and the minimum that a pilots earns is not €100,000? :confused:
The only other conclusion that I can come to is that they don't employ pilots in the right hand seat, in which case has the IAA given them an dispensation?
Faire d'income
5th Jan 2007, 15:30
Anyone in this industry who starts as a new entry pilot on €100,000 is in clover.
Anyone that believes any Ryanair statement as being completely true obviously has never had any dealings with them.
Basic pay for f/o at the moment: Low €20ks
When your face doesn't fit you get no flights and possibly a transfer ( at your own expense ). Try living on €20k odd with a mortgage and training bills.
CamelhAir
5th Jan 2007, 16:33
When your face doesn't fit you get no flights
Nothing to do with your face mate, when you're bending over, your face is gonna be hidden. Remember, you really gotta bend right over to be in favour :}
An utter lack of self-respect and self-worth is a prerequisite to be a new FR FO.
Flying_Muppet
6th Jan 2007, 16:13
ALL FR pilots work extremly hard and MOL gets more than thier moneys worth out of them. I think for the job all FR pilots do is completly under stated ! They work bloody hard full f**ken stop !!
I hope they screw the Management for what its worth.:D
Nobody doubts that the FR pilots work hard, or that MOL makes a lot of money from them. Clearly the working conditions are bad and I am aware of the alleged underhand tactics that FR play. But ultimately it comes down to the age old phrase - if you don't like it then don't do it.
Everybody knows what they are going to be going in for when they sign on the dotted line. The reason that MOL can get away with treating his staff so badly is because there are plenty of pilots that are prepared to work under poor conditions and get paid a pittance; these are the people that are partly to blame for the poor conditions that airline pilots are now dealt with.
The reason other industries aren't in such a mess is because the staff wouldn't tolerate it. They would resign and therefore the company would be forced to provide the staff with good T's and C's in order to survive.
CamelhAir
6th Jan 2007, 18:03
Everybody knows what they are going to be going in for when they sign on the dotted line.
Wrong. It is a well known fact that ryanair treat contracts as their personal plaything, to be changed at will.
alleged underhand tactics that FR play.
Nothing alleged about these tactics. Again, fact. In case you doubt, the Supreme Court of Ireland will shortly set you straight.
Dangil
7th Jan 2007, 11:37
To all of you at FR, trying to get your rights as human beings to being treated fairly, realised, and not just being payed off to shut up, keep it up guys and gals, you deserve to win.
I wish you all the very best of luck, Oh but if you do decide to take the other option of "If you don't like it leave", there is life after Ryanair, and believe me it's a happier one.
Leo Hairy-Camel
8th Jan 2007, 00:02
And so now no more do we receive the wisdom we so badly want to read
Don't be so sure, Roger.
Well, happy New Year everybody, and goodness me, haven’t the season of hostilities commenced early this year! What can it be that has the masses quivering with such giddy anticipation? Gosh, it’s probably El Niño (http://www.elnino.noaa.gov/), or all that hot air recently spewing forth from the British junior blowhole Ian Pearson. No matter. Whatever the reason be, dear readers, might I suggest we start the year on a note of seriousness, rather than with the customary hysteria that events concerning Ryanair seems to inspire in the minds of those incontinent screeching howler monkeys that populate Corballis Park (http://www.ialpa.net/). Time for a reality check, me thinks.
Now then, if you all listen very, very carefully, you will hear from across the Irish Sea a certain rustling in the distance. What you’re hearing is the sound of IALPA and the no-neck polyester dwarf who leads it, lathering themselves into a frenzy of lubricated glee at what they presume will be a savaging for Ryanair at the hands of the Irish courts, and more excitingly, the cash bonanza that will surely follow for their long suffering members. Apparently, they would have us believe this long and tawdry saga is finally drawing to its orgasmic conclusion on the last day of this month. We shall see.
For those of you unfamiliar with our saga, permit me to join the dots for you. In the interests of brevity, I will presume that most of you are familiar with our little airline called Ryanair (http://www.ryanair.com/site/about/invest/docs/present/quarter2_2007.pdf). We have 120ish Boeing 737-800’s on line at present and employ over 1500 pilots to fly them. This year, 2007, will see us with 200 aircraft online, an achievement we’re looking forward to enormously. We have around another 160 brand new aircraft on order for the time being, and will need to employ thousands more pilots to fly them in due course, thus creating opportunities for young men and women across Europe to actively pursue their dreams of a job in the airline world that otherwise wouldn’t exist, a fact conspicuously overlooked in certain unsavoury industrial quarters, but more on that later.
We make a great deal of money doing what we do because, in part, we’re led by European aviation’s answer to Alexander the Great, our CEO Michael O’Leary. The man who is succeeding where the likes of Napoleon and Hitler both failed, in uniting Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals, and maybe even beyond. In short, we’re a good news story all round. Sadly though, like all flourishing organisms, we attract more than our fair share of parasites.
Enter stage left IALPA, apparently some sort of sheltered workshop for short, poorly dressed champagne socialists, and their colleagues across the water at BALPA, or as it is more commonly known to the frustration of many, the British Airways pilots fur-lined conditions maintenance and enhancement bureau. These two dinosaurs of the industrial revolution, each constantly seeking to outdo the other in displays of their own irrelevance, fell into bed one moonlit night and a short time later out popped the fruit of their loins in the form of REPA, with a face only a mother could love. And what a hairless, incompetent turd our little bastard has turned out to be in the months since its ignominious birth.
In one early disaster, REPA very nearly roasted alive a fine and decent man who was good naturedly persuaded to bulwark their first foray. To this day, in a truly breathtaking display of wobbly spin doctoring, REPA’s string pullers refer to this unfortunate episode as their “pyrrhic victory”, but I call it for what it is. An abject failure and poignant demonstration of their ceaseless malevolence, writ large. Since then REPA has launched failed attacks on almost every aspect of our operation, from maintenance to pilot selection and training. The list is long. Evan Cullen, IALPA’s vertically challenged organ-grinder-in-chief even went public in the letters page of Flight International with a poorly worded innuendo designed, apparently, to call upon the Irish Aviation Authority to investigate the seemingly endless list of faults he regurgitates and hurls in the direction of Ryanair. How embarrassing for the Dwarf that when challenged by Lilian Cassin of the IAA to put up or shut up, even privately, he chose the latter. Oh dear, Evan. Forced to swallow your own bull**** yet again! After your appearance on the tellie last year, though, I imagine you’re getting used to the flavour of dung by now.
With the exception of a few easily led grey-haired popinjays in Dublin, long term employees who seem to think that their tenure entitles them to special consideration, most of us Ryanair pilots are happy campers, but Irish pride wouldn’t permit these multi millionaire prima donnas to accept that they’d screwed the pooch in taking on our Alexander, and so they enlisted the secret, dark and midnight forces of two pointless, lunatic organisations in the rather forlorn hope of uniting the troops. Their attempts thus far have been a truly hilarious concoction of farce and falsehood that makes the Keystone cops seem like the shining lights of law enforcement virtue. They claim huge numbers of supporters, but what they don’t tell you is that these “supporters” amount to nothing more than those of us who enjoy signing up to their Aer Lingus funded website to observe the festivities from the safety of distance. Not one single Ryanair pilot has put a single Euro into REPA, and I’ll be thrilled to see just how many do when the time comes. For now, REPA shout from the rooftops about how many members they enjoy. Ho-hum. If you dress a pig in a bonnet and a pretty dress, it remains a pig underneath. Pilots are a funny bunch when asked to throw money at pointless causes.
I hope the New Year finds you well, Minuteman, and I’m sorry that your Christmas jackpot was postponed from December 21st to the end of January. May I offer an old friend some advice, though? I’d hold off on putting in that new boat order just yet if I were you. The fat lady is stirring, but with the Ryanair share price nudging €11, I wouldn’t expect a particularly long aria.
b17heavy
8th Jan 2007, 01:14
Bravo, Leo, bravo. Your rhetoric is truly marvellous, whilst your chastising of many individuals is somewhat amusing, it serves little purpose or indeed has little point. Tell me old boy have you though of auditioning for the RSC ?
Moreover your references to Alexander the third and Hitler are concerning, not only for the your total lack of forethought, but seeming poor knowledge of both… Let me suggest – maybe a Dickensian work house ethic kind of thing would have been better. But I digress…
I’m sure you are well aware of what the issues are and no amount of speech making with tawdry historical comparisons can alter this. You know full well what happened was a disgrace and there must be some accountability. After all that’s business - right ?
If you fail to see what the problem is here then you are more lost in your own idiom that I first thought. Spare a though for someone else, it really is quite liberating :ok:
fivehundred
8th Jan 2007, 01:52
Hi Leo,
Im new here.
Dont Wish me a Happy New Year. You Hypocrite.
I am new here and all I can say is you are a disgrace.
Its guys like you, and I know your not MOL, are dragging this place into the mire.
Please wake up.
lets protect ourselves. Long Live IALPA
RogerIrrelevant69
8th Jan 2007, 07:24
Many thanks Leo, this latest monologue ticks many of the boxes your finest contributions have ticked.
No doubt this will lead to dozens of replies today but in the interest of brevity (a concept not entirely familiar to LHC) a couple of top tips for the novice reader:
1. LHC monologues are not and never have been a cue for dialogue. This is strictly a one way process. Specific questions to LHC about any aspect of FR's operation past, present or future will be ignored unless they are very convenient. This may frustrate some less familiar with LHC but there you have it.
2. LHC is not MOL (evidence suggests MOL's vocabulary runs to about 10% of LHC's). However, I am lead to believe LHC is not too far removed from sharing the same trough.
In one early disaster, REPA very nearly roasted alive a fine and decent man who was good naturedly persuaded to bulwark their first foray.Leo this is a direct reflection of the thinking of the most senior figures in Ryanair management. I know, because I have a direct connection to both sides of this argument and I have direct quotes from two such figures in Ryanair and a personal conversation with the individual concerned.
Here is your problem. Not only have you been repeatedly told that this man NEVER had anything involvement, but a judge of the High Court has spelled out the facts in considerable detail (which I have read). And those facts are that there NEVER was a case - nor any evidence - against the "fine and decent man" (one of the few accurate bits in your post; however, if he is such a "fine and decent man" why do you accuse him of being a liar?).
What my sources tells me is that the most senior levels of Ryanair management think that they really did have the "right man", that the judge got it wrong, that a former manager from Stansted "let them down badly" and finally, that their legal counsel in the case - wait for it - "failed to cross-examine properly".
What the judge did say contradicts what you say. Most of rest of us mortals have noticed that the targeting of "a fine a decent man" has occurred on more than one occasion in Ryanair.
You find such behaviour acceptable. Which yet again speaks volumes about you. Unless, that is, you are a fool of the greatest order and actually DO think that this "fine and decent man" is also a liar and guilty of intimidation and bullying (or even of involvement in the events you describe). I believe his denials, you clearly do not. Your reference to him is thus self-serving and suggests cynicism of the highest order.
The rest of your stuff is typical hot air (and IALPA clearly is getting to you, judging from your venom!). But it is about time you sorted out where you stand on the issue of this "fine and decent man". Either you and MOL are right, or a judge of the High Court is right. I know where my vote is going.
the grim repa
8th Jan 2007, 09:20
now i know how to cure my insomnia,log onto pprune about 01:02.what a nights sleep i had.must be my clear conscience.how did you sleep leo the loser.see you on the 31st buddy,bring the check book,HA!HA!bye the way,you a beginning to repeat yourself,not a good sign.loser!
Having read LHC's post I feel inclined to dontate my sector cheque this month to REPA ! Unfortunalty it's worth f**k all...
keep up the good work Neil.....
CamelhAir
8th Jan 2007, 13:27
I was reading the Camels latest diatribe and a historical comparison immediately sprang to mind. Any student of the European history will be aware of Hitler's actions in the last few days of the Third Reich, as he moved non-existant divisions around the battle map, planned grandiose counter attacks with long-destroyed battle groups, planned the rebuilding of Berlin, ranted and raved against traitors and enemies, real or perceived, and generally indulged in the highly delusional and deranged while the edifices of his empire fell around him.
60 years later another delusional character has moved into the final stages of his own battle. Each posting is an ever surer sign that victory is imminent.
captplaystation
8th Jan 2007, 16:48
I've said it before, and no doubt I'll say it again, but I find it more than a little disturbing to think that one so manifestly delusional as sad old Leo is actually left in charge of a public transport aircraft. JEEZUS.
Sunfish
8th Jan 2007, 20:04
Happy New Year Mr. Camel!
We have around another 160 brand new aircraft on order for the time being, and will need to employ thousands more pilots to fly them in due course, thus creating opportunities for young men and women across Europe to actively pursue their dreams of a job in the airline world that otherwise wouldn’t exist, a fact conspicuously overlooked in certain unsavoury industrial quarters, but more on that later.
I'm sure that last century's mine owners used similar descriptive language lauding their incredible generosity in providing jobs for children in coal mines.
P.S. How big is you cash mountain these days and how does it compare with your long and short term liabilities?
Ignition Override
9th Jan 2007, 03:42
In the past, was there a comparison made between Ryanair and (US) Southwest Airlines?
This type of legal action at Southwest Airlines appears, based on all media articles familiar to me, along with pilot reports, to be incomprehensible.
We have many furloughed and active pilots who would give anything to work at Southwest or Fedex. Our youngest pilots, whether active or not, are all at least 36 years old, many in their early 40s.
It should not go unnoticed that Ireland has particularly generous tax benefits for aircraft leasing companies. British banks have their leasing arms registered in Ireland for that reason.
One of the interesting facts about the Ryanair accounts is the number of aircraft that appear on operating leases. I suspect that sell and leaseback is a part of the story of the Ryanair financial success story.
CamelhAir
10th Jan 2007, 20:54
I suspect that sell and leaseback is a part of the story of the Ryanair financial success story.
Indeed it is. The figures for 2005, as I recall, show that ryanairs 21% operating margin is very misleading. Strip out the profit from the sale and leaseback operation and the margin is a rather less than spectacular approx 7% - less than, for example. BA and EI in the same year. So the model is all well and good at the moment, but what happens next?
As I see it, at some point, the source of cheap aircraft runs out. Boeing, understandably, will be less than enthusiastic about selling fr another load of cheapies, seeing fr then use said aircraft to massively undercut Boeings list price on new aircraft, by selling their own new, or nearly new, aircraft for a lot less. Boeing are now being screwed twice. Airbus, too, will no doubt be also less than interested in the same happening to them.
So what next? Now fr becomes an airline with similar margins to other companies out there. An airline has control over 2 things with which to raise margins, namely 1) raise yields or 2) cut costs.
This is when fr runs in to trouble, and is possibly the reason MOL is selling his shares regularly, and why the Ryan family no longer retain any substantial interest in ryanair.
Why? Let's look first at raising yields. Ryanair has nowhere to go here, simply because cheap fares are virtually the only reason anyone flies with us. The service is so poor (non-existant) and the whole experience so awful for a passenger, that it will not be possible to raise fares and keep the punters coming. Why would you as a passenger? Given a similar price to almost any rival, its a no-brainer which airline will be chosen.
So that leaves costs. But there's a limit to where this can go, and they're bloody low already. The staff can be bullied to an extent (an extent which will be a lot less post-Jan 31st), but staff costs are only a relatively small portion of costs. Many many more costs are outside ryanairs control and won't succumb as readily to MOL's bluster. Other airlines on the other hand have fat here to reduce.
Its arguable that costs can be driven much lower and its certain that yields can't be driven higher, so once the cheap aircraft run out, watch the shareprice plummet faster than a Knock approach.
RogerIrrelevant69
10th Jan 2007, 21:17
CamelhAir,
Thought provoking indeed. Reminds me of a documentary I watched the other day called "Enron: The Smartest Guys In The Room". A must see for those interested in spin and fraud in the world of business. Having been a employee of a dot.com company that became a dot.bomb company, it all rang rather true. Lucky I sold my shares at $32 each and not the current value of $0 :)
Any chance of a sequel about Ryanair in a few years time? Suggested titles on a postcard please.
The figures for 2005, as I recall, show that ryanairs 21% operating margin is very misleading. Strip out the profit from the sale and leaseback operation and the margin is a rather less than spectacular approx 7% - less than, for example. BA and EI in the same year.
Now who's going tell me who owned that great Irish leasing company Guinness Peat and what happened to them after they cornered the market in Boeing products up to 2000; that must have been in the mid 80's?
Sunfish
11th Jan 2007, 03:27
As i've said before; "The New Business Model" has been the trumpeted reason for the apparent meteoric success of many businesses since before the great depression, I seem to recall words to the effect that "economies of scale and new technologies underpin todays historically high share price gains " - these were said by an analyst just before the great crash (1929).
However "The New Business Model" usually turns out to be one of the same old depressingly familiar business models dressed in fancy new clothes and a bit of lipstick.
It is extremely hard for any business to produce returns very different from its competitors in the long term, period, assuming that neither you or your competitors are complete idiots. There are certain costs you can perhaps trim better than the next guy, you may gain efficiencies and be a little more market savvy than your competitors, but the advantages are fleeting since your competitors will emulate your best ideas anyway. this even happens on a national scale - remember the "Asian Tiger" economies??????
So how and why do companies trumpet about "New Business models" and why do people listen? The answer is that people want to believe they can get something for nothing. They want "good news" stories. They want to believe that their shares in "Grot PLC" really are going to be worth ten times more than "Muck PLC", "Rubbish PLC" and all the other recycling firms.
So when the Chairman of Grotco gets up and trumpets about his new business model, how its a boon to mankind and how it has permanently changed the rules of the rubbish recycling industry (sorry make that the residue reprocessing industry) he gets a standing ovation.
However the truth is usually more prosaic. Grotco has either cooked its books by understating its liabilities or fallen for the temptation of underpricing its products in the hope of driving its competitors out of business and then raising its prices to make up the shortfall. The auditors occasionally discover the mess, but not always until the cash runs out.
Would Ryanair be following one of these business models? How would I know? But I am suspicious of new paradigms that don't appear on the surface to make much sense. Especially when their promoters keep talking about their benefits to mankind and not their core sustainable profitability, shorn of extraordinary transactions.
Call me an old fashioned dinosaur, but I care not for new business models or growth or revenue prospects or benefits to mankind and small furry animals. I want to see the dividend cheque.
Fogie
12th Jan 2007, 01:24
Hi ,
Can we have a reality check, m o'l is trying to help pilots realize that life is not only about money and status,or flying,but the sacrifice of self for the greater good.:)
I feel so priviliged that both his archangels and self have chosen to be so honest in sharing the torment and anguish which they have suffered to reach this point of perfection.:cool:
And as I pause in thought and prayer,a moment of doubt crosses my mind fleetingly, are they true and honest or just a group of shallow,materialistic people who were neglected by their parents and bullied at school,but that passes.;)
But as I go to my bed,I realize that there is a little bit of them in me,but more important part of us in them ?.:ok:
Sleep well ,Love those close to you and don't be afraid of the Bogeyman :}
Finman
12th Jan 2007, 10:26
OK Leo! I know you are not MOL but lets just pretend. Now that you have taken on board that 900 hours as a target was 'no way to run an airline' (according to PB anyway) you have set a new target of 875 hours. What this means in effect is that your pilots will average 850 hours per year (and many will be lucky to reach that this year). Given that that means you need to find another 75000 block hours of crew (1500 pilots X 50 hours) this will cost you an additional £3,750,000 in basic wages. Of course this is better than last years debacle when you had to stump up £17,000,000 in leasing fees due to DOBs screw up in under crewing the airline. The big question for someone who won't let his staff use their phone chargers at work to save pennies (cents) is this: doesn't it really really irk you to have all those lazy pilots sitting at home on standby doing nothing, being paid their basic pay, when you could be working them the extra 50 hours? Have you gone soft?
the grim repa
18th Jan 2007, 19:51
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2007/s1829586.htm
Beware australia,the pit pony show is coming to town!
drnick384
19th Jan 2007, 00:42
Ryanair is a non-unionised company. The staff are all in profit sharing:confused:
What a load of :mad:
BEagle
24th Jan 2007, 16:59
Only 1 week to go until the Irish Supreme Court date...........
gulfairs
25th Jan 2007, 19:44
I flew for one of their branches back in the late 80's and early 90's
Compared to the the worst employer I ever had in a 58 year working life,
Ryanair, was head and shoulders above the rest, for being a good employer.
Tough, demanding but adequate pay( who does not want a little more?),
And crew scheduling was supreme.
My worst employer ever was the NZ flag carrier in the early and mid 80's.
It is hard to be satisfied all the time,
But get unemployed and see how good any job is.
CamelhAir
25th Jan 2007, 20:17
I flew for one of their branches back in the late 80's and early 90's
Compared to the the worst employer I ever had in a 58 year working life,
Ryanair, was head and shoulders above the rest, for being a good employer.
No disrespect, but you've clearly no idea what the situation is now. The fr of that period was the same as the fr of now in name only. It is in no way at all even remotely the same in every other sense. Please read any random thread about the place now to see what the current reality is.
Leo Hairy-Camel
26th Jan 2007, 11:19
Yes, that’s right Camel Hair, any one silly enough to have an opinion divergent to your own is either uninformed, ignorant or just plain wrong. You never fail to disappoint.
Could it be that loads of money, stable rosters and your own bed every night is appealing to experienced pilots accustomed to the polar opposite? Could it be that a first officer’s job on a shiny new 737-800 is seen as desirable to youngsters starting out upon their careers?
Could it be that the current outrages being perpetrated upon BA by the TGWU is just the latest example of how unenlightened and unwanted unions are in our business?
You might very well think so, Camel Hair, I couldn’t possibly comment.
CamelhAir
26th Jan 2007, 16:02
:zzz: :rolleyes:
Leo, the opinions that count are that of the Supreme court and of the Labour court. Were you to pay as close attention to your heroes words to the markets as you do to dissing your so-called colleagues, you'd realise that even he expects to lose.
In the mean time, why not share some of your "loads of money" with the likes of your less well-off colleagues that can only afford to sleep in the car at the airport.
the grim repa
26th Jan 2007, 19:16
Nice latin quote there,whats it mean LOSER!
Finman
26th Jan 2007, 19:50
Stupid is as stupid does. So who is stupid?
also.....It becomes worse for the remedies employed. You have to guess where that is quoted!
Marvo
27th Jan 2007, 16:28
It's no where near the 70 - 130 K advertised as the wage for F/O's and Captains. I will be struggling to fly my 900hrs this year and at FR your sector pay makes up a subtantial amout of your take home pay.
Superpilot
31st Jan 2007, 17:24
Today is the 31st. What happened? No news as yet.
Aloue
31st Jan 2007, 18:17
It appears that it was delayed by one day ... 10:45 - Thursday February 1st for a verdict.
BEagle
1st Feb 2007, 09:53
From http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0201/ryanair.html:
Supreme Court to rule in Ryanair pilots' case
Thursday, 1 February 2007 09:40
The Supreme Court will rule later today on whether the Labour Court is entitled to hear complaints by Ryanair pilots against the airline.
Under new legislation introduced in 2004, workers in companies which do not recognise unions can have their grievances investigated by the Labour Court - with or without the participation of the employer in question.
Crucially, that Labour Court determination can now be legally enforced by the Circuit Court.
Ryanair has accused the new legislation of introducing compulsory union recognition by the back door.
The airline has argued the legislation was never intended to apply to what it called 'high-pay multi-nationals' like Ryanair.
The High Court dismissed Ryanair's bid to halt the Labour Court investigations but the airline appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Ryanair case is viewed as a crucial test case in establishing the scope and effectiveness of the new legislation.
The_Bean_Counter
1st Feb 2007, 10:11
All quiet, still no news ?
Just heard on the radio that they found in favour of Ryanair. Not much detailgiven in the report though.
Irishboy
1st Feb 2007, 10:17
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0201/ryanair.html
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Labour Court is not entitled to hear complaints by Ryanair pilots against the airline.
Under new legislation introduced in 2004, workers in companies which do not recognise unions can have their grievances investigated by the Labour Court - with or without the participation of the employer in question.
The airline had argued that the legislation was never intended to apply to what it called 'high-pay multi-nationals' like Ryanair.
Ryanair had accused the new legislation of introducing compulsory union recognition by the back door.
Originally, the High Court dismissed Ryanair's bid to halt the Labour Court investigations but the airline appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Ryanair case is viewed as a crucial test case in establishing the scope and effectiveness of the new legislation.
OneWorld22
1st Feb 2007, 10:51
That's great news. Well done FR.
Wrong again Jolly G G. The RTE headline is being changed - now that they have read the judgement. That's the news from another website.
Ryanair will be back in the Labour Court with IALPA in the next few weeks.
Imagine taking such delight at your belief that Ryanair had won a victory over "fellow pilots"!
OneWorld22
1st Feb 2007, 11:03
I would support a victory of sheer bloody common sense.
babemagnet
1st Feb 2007, 11:08
I wonder how many pilots will leave Ryanair now?????
BEagle
1st Feb 2007, 11:21
Well now, but there's a thing:
"Ryanair has won its appeal challenging the right of the Labour Court to investigate complaints by the airline's pilots.
The Supreme Court found that procedures used by the Labour Court in its preliminary hearing were flawed, and has ordered a re-hearing of the case, though with full court procedures to ensure that the rights of all parties - including the employer - are protected.
Ryanair has welcomed the ruling, but IMPACT, which took the case on behalf of the pilots, expressed disappointment. But the union welcomed the fact that a re-hearing had been ordered."
Not quite the 'victory' some had thought........
Blue06
1st Feb 2007, 11:22
If it is such a hell to work for FR why dont ya'll get a new job? It should'nt be a problem for you guys with 500+ hrs on 737 to get a new job.
It is partially the pilots own fault since they will take the job, working their ass off for **** all.... :yuk:
If we all get together and refuse to work under certain conditions, FR must reconsider the the terms for pilots.
The same thing with self funded TR. FR and others won't bother paying for the our TR as long as there are hundreds out there willing to pay themselves!! :ugh: :D
If everyone said NO, FR would'nt have an option!!
Damn prostitutes! :E
CamelhAir
1st Feb 2007, 11:31
More ryanair spin that got through to RTE methinks. Ryanair will have you believe that the Supreme Court removed the possibility of the Labour Court adjudicating on the dispute. As far as I read it, quite the opposite in fact, the Supreme Court has copperfastened the right of the Labour Court to hear the case by ordering the Labour Court to re-hear the it. So we re-play the game.
The important points so far (and points that fr and its fellow travellers would rather didn't exist):
The Supreme Court has not ruled against the relevant employment legislation.
The Labour Court has the right to re-hear the case.
In terms of the judgement as a delaying tactic, ryanair did win. In terms of the overall battle, they DID NOT. The pilots are neither closer to nor farther away from victory today. But victory remains within our grasp.
I urge all ryanair pilots to remain positive. Despondency plays into the hands of our detractors. Smoke, mirrors and obfuscation are the tactics of those who wish to see us fail Ultimately however truth and justice will prevail.
alibaba
1st Feb 2007, 11:49
Blue06,
It must be hard up there in the moral high ground! Have you considered the use of oxygen in them lofty heights to aid in the hard work you are putting in building that church on top of the mountain. :}
People need to feed their families and will do what they can at the time to make sure they are fed.... Paying for TR isn't a good thing but if it gives access to a job when other jobs are not around then people will do it. It is as simple as that.
If we could get a recruitment ban on all companies that make pilots pay for initial TR's than that would be the best formula! That though would lead to bans on FR, Easy Jet as you pay the TR in your salary after, Monarch, Thompson, Thomas Cook, Aer Arann and a few others to name just a few. Ah yes they don't pay upfront. Pilots only pay for TR's for 3 to 5 years after with salary reductions etc. Plus the added benefit of lower wages in the first 6 months from coming off the CTC program in line training. Maybe around the £150 a week mark is what I had heard of some reports if any money at all. Can you tell me the overall differance? Pilots are still paying for the TR in most of these companies. Are they prostitutes also?
Not forgetting that a huge proportion of FR pilots were already part of the company when TR's were starting to get charged to new joiners so didn't have to pay for TR's.
the grim repa
1st Feb 2007, 12:06
We,the pilots at ryanair are determined to uphold the highest safety srandards for the transport of our passengers and also to ensure that the public recieve the best service and lowest fares,despite the efforts of a minority of greedy managers within ryanair.managers on £800,000 plus bonuses per year who would screw the public out of a few quid.
The ruling on this case at the supreme court today will not now or ever deflect us from our mission to cheaply,safely and comfortably carry our passengers from country to country.We will also protect the environment,despite our managers unwillingness to do so!
CamelhAir
1st Feb 2007, 12:17
Whey exactly should the Labour Court intervene in a situation like this involving a non unionised workforce??
Because the vast majority of the workforce have joined the union and favour such intervention.
Ryanair are non-unionised only in that management, as yet, don't recognise the union. Ryanair are unionised in so far as most pilots are members of the union.
OneWorld22
1st Feb 2007, 12:19
The airlines doesn't recognise any union. It doesn't work that way. You all know this and under Irish law, FR are not required to recognise a union.
CamelhAir
1st Feb 2007, 12:25
The airlines doesn't recognise any union. It doesn't work that way. You all know this and under Irish law, FR are not required to recognise a union.
They may not have to recognise the union, BUT:
Under new legislation introduced in 2004, workers in companies which do not recognise unions can have their grievances investigated by the Labour Court - with or without the participation of the employer in question.
(Courtesy RTE website.)
And this is where we stand, where we always stood. The Supreme Court has upheld this legislation. So FR doesn't have to recognise the union BUT the Labour Court does have the right to investigate the grievance.
Wizofoz
1st Feb 2007, 12:26
You all know this and under Irish law
1world,
So, your idea is to recognise and uphold the pieces of Irish law that you like, whilst ignoring the pieces (like the Labour courts right to intervene in non-unionised companies) that you don't?
It doesn't work that way either.....
free at last
1st Feb 2007, 12:37
You went to a low cost carrier, you knew the rules, don't expect a sociolistick government to bail you out! Never pay for training, and a 500hr pilot should be flight instructing, not in a jet with lots of people. Automation will not always save the day.
Blue06
1st Feb 2007, 12:47
alibaba:
Since I am The Defender of Moral, I'm not satiesfied with a churc. My cathedral is almost finished, payed for with the money I saved on NOT paying RYANAIR otr other LCC to work for them! :E
To be a little more serious:
Off course, I have full understanding for people needing a job. But as long as pilots are paying for TR, things will never change.
You say the best thing would be an overall ban for self-funded TR. Now, who do you think have to make sure that happens? The airlines? :ugh:
It is up to us, the pilots, to ensure good workinconditions etc.
As the marked for pilots is on the rise we should start setting the standards.
The airlines, with LCC in the lead, don't give a flying f*ck as long as it saves them money!
This thing with CTC or similar Cadet-schemes is the same ****, if not worse. If a guy has £20.000 to spend on a rating up front, thats one thing. Another is a guy fresh out of flight school with a huge morgage. In addition he/she joins CTC and will suffer for the next 3,4,5 years with reduced pay! :yuk:
I understand that the airlines want value for the money they spend on their pilots. I see bonding as an acceptable way. Lets say FR pay for the 737TR for a new pilot, to the cost of £20.000 incl hotels transport etc. Those 20k is devided in 36 equal parts, one part each month for 3 years. 1/36 of 20k is then deducted from the TR cost as long as the pilot works for the company, while the pilots recieves normal pay. If he leaves after 24 mnths, he must pay the remaining 12/36... You can use 3 years or 5 years, whatever... The point is that the pilot dont suffer by paying himself. He pays the airline back by working for them. Thats one option...
God Loves a Flyer
1st Feb 2007, 13:13
So FR doesn't have to recognise the union BUT the Labour Court does have the right to investigate the grievance.
I'm afraid that's not the case:
The Labour court's original decision was that it had the right to hear Ryanair's case.
It based this decision on certain arguments that the supreme court has ruled were incorrect.
Now the labour court has been ordered to hold another hearing to decide if it can investigate the grievance.
Given that the supreme court has ruled that the arguments previously used by the labour court (to determine that it had jurisdiction) were incorrect it's hard to see how any hearing could establish that the labour court has a right to hear the case.
RogerIrrelevant69
1st Feb 2007, 14:40
Hmm, there doesn't seem to be much point in either side claiming victory just now, now does there?
The Supreme Court found that procedures used by the Labour Court in its preliminary hearing were flawed, and has ordered a re-hearing of the case.
Doesn't take a legal expert to determine what that means. Procedural problems with original hearing so start again....
No room for crowing on either side.
alibaba
1st Feb 2007, 16:03
Blue06, I think we are in danger of going off thread here!
We seem to be singing off the say hymn sheet here (so to speak). IFALPA would be the organisation that could implement a recruitment ban for self funding types. So it could be organised and you are right to say that the only people to change the airlines doing this practice should be the pilots themselves. Unfortunately life is not that simple. Most of us wish it was.
I sincerely congratulate you for not having to fund your own TR, you were or are in a very fortunate position. I wouldn't be so quick to slam other colleagues that choose to take this direction in their own career though. They have a choice and I think they are well aware of the consequences of there choices. If pilots could choose to not pay for TR's and be bonded I think 90% of the total numbers doing TR's would be getting bonded. Bonding arrangements should be the way pilots should be doing TR's but it isn't the way most of the industry is operating at the moment.
The pretext that it is only LCC charging for TR's is wrong though. Many airlines do this and have been doing this for years especially in the charter area and in the regional part of the industry so everybody should wise up. It is just that FR is willing to push the boundaries that little bit more. The USA is not exempt from this either "free at last". If I remember rightly there are many candidates from COMAIR, American Flyers and Flight Safety buying types with regional and night cargo operators. It is not something confined to Europe but something that is international and wide spread. The only reason why the candidates are not buying types for the major's is that they have too many pilots at this current point in time and there is already a large supply from the military and regionals to fill seats. Also there is good T+C's set down with flight crew partner unions such as ALPA for the practice not to take off with the majors. A liberalisation of employment laws combined with a lax approach of European based pilot unions about their members T+C's has led to the current state of affairs that pilots now suffer in Europe.
Just because the FO might not have 2000hrs chugging around in a C150 doesn't make him a poor quality pilot. :ok: A good pilot with good CRM skills doesn't mean 10,000hrs total either. We have all flown with experienced and inexperienced pilots and the ability of the pilot generally has nothing to do with his total time. It just means he has been sitting in the seat longer!!! After line training all pilots should have the minimum standards as set down under the authorities for 2 pilot operations. Have a look at a few safety reports into accidents such as CFIT related accidents and you will find that it is the most experienced of crews that often make the worst mistakes. Overconfidence can be the deadliest of killers!
I would like to comment about the statement that if it is so bad in LCC why don't you get a new job? This is a pathetic argument and something that the uneducated in employment bullying and harassment do not understand. People on the whole wish the best for their company and there own colleagues in that company. Sometimes it is better to try and change a company’s employment policy to its staff so that the philosophy doesn't move onto other companies. You have to draw the line somewhere! I think this is what the FR pilots are trying to achieve and should be getting help from fellow pilots like ourselves. Because to put it bluntly if the pilots and employees in FR do not draw this line, you can bet your bottom dollar that this type of practice will be coming to a airline or employer to a place allot like yours. So it is easy to leave and not put up a fight. It might change your live for the better in the short term, but it won't in the long term. As these practices will eventually make there way to your new employer! :sad:
Oneworld22 you are so far of the mark….:suspect: ... The law has been ruled to be lawful and constitutional in terms of the Labour Courts right to rule in this case and the actions sought by IALPA. However it has been ruled by the Supreme Court in Ireland that the particular proceedings of the case as heard in the Labour Court Judgment weren't correct with respect to the current law therefore the case has been asked to be heard again by the Labour Court with respect to proper proceedings undertaken the next time. So the emphasis is back on Impact and IALPA to prove that FR doesn’t directly negotiate by an independent non arbitory manor and that intimidation of pilots does take place in the company. I don't think that will be to hard to show now......:cool: Do you?
easymoney
1st Feb 2007, 19:36
Good post Alibaba.......couldn't agree more.
Leo Hairy-Camel
1st Feb 2007, 23:43
REJOICE (http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/39e4508ad30bd86080257275003db5ad?OpenDocument) REJOICE REJOICE (http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/597645521f07ac9a80256ef30048ca52/6FC868C9BD25BD0F80257275003DDE71?opendocument).
I do not think this makes any difference because what was involved was an inquiry as to the Labour Court’s own jurisdiction and the Labour Court was not entitled to make legal errors in considering its own jurisdiction.
Gosh!
I would allow the appeal. I would quash the decision of the Labour Court and order that there be a rehearing by the Labour Court in which the Labour Court would apply the procedures and the law as indicated in this judgment.
In other words, you're sunk.
Alexander (Vincit omnia veritas) 1.
Dwarf Investments Inc. (Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus) zero.
Faire d'income
2nd Feb 2007, 00:21
Leo the referee was found to be unfit at the time of the match. The game will be replayed.
Hardly cause for World Cup winners style celebration, unless of course you have never won a match before. :rolleyes:
RogerIrrelevant69
2nd Feb 2007, 08:10
LHC must have one of those funny little daily Latin phrase generators.
Today it popped up for him: "Vincit omnia veritas" which according to my knowledge of Latin and Goggle means: "Truth conquers all". Not exactly a phrase to be bandied lightly around FR I would venture but who and ever...
Or does it have relevance to the case at hand? Well not that I can see as from what has been published in the press so far indicates quite clearly that the case has to be re-heard from the start due to procedural problems. Therefore no truth has been established and therefore no conquering has occurred - if we follow LHC's wee quote.
Rejoice all you like. The game has to be replayed...
b17heavy
2nd Feb 2007, 12:36
Leo – once again with childish references to Alexander and the Latin…. My dear fellow, how is it that you seem of an intelligent mind but are so hell bent on portraying yourself as a pseudo intellectual with the use pithy quotes from the internet.
You also seemingly unable to separate your apparent love Alexander, from the matter at hand. You claim to be a man of business and commerce and yet have no appreciation of accountability ?
I don’t agree that unions should run the show, but you can’t have it all your own way. You are not dealing with a commodity, you are dealing with people. Why do you persist with the stick approach at Ryanair, when in fact you could achieve even more by actually being a reasonable group of individuals ?
I am not looking for a come back with some juvenile Jerry Springer response about Euros in the bank, or employment figures, because that is not what we are discussing. In fact, I can only assume that your posts are just to provoke a response and you don’t really believe in what you say.:ok:
Carmoisine
2nd Feb 2007, 13:14
Leo,
Alexander (Vincit omnia veritas) 1.
Dwarf Investments Inc. (Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus) zero
You must have a short memory? I think the score is more like this:
Ryanair : 1 (Supreme court orders a rematch in the Labour Court)
Others : 4 (Cliodhna Duggan, John Goss, Millionth Pax, Repa Court Case)
So back to the Labour Court we go then. Round Two! Ding, Ding.
http://www.squ.edu.om/lan/p69CamelSign.jpg
Captain Chaos
2nd Feb 2007, 14:13
Bottom line is you guys lost. Even if you consider that we both go back to the starting point Ryan Air has the financial staying power,that IALPA does not,to drag this out for years.
When are you guys gonna learn.Unions are dead.
What is wrong with you all anyway.Great salary and home every night. Thats why every body wants to come here.
curser
2nd Feb 2007, 14:42
C.C dont be an ass. We have to go back to the labour court thats all and I dont see what your so happy about your pay is **** and you have awful T&C's.
pilot999
2nd Feb 2007, 14:44
Thank god for unions and repa. with out them i would have nothing to read at home in my bed every night after an enjoyable days flying at work.
rubik101
2nd Feb 2007, 16:59
"Ireland: Ryanair fears €20m pilot hit
Brian Carey
Oh really?
Captain Chaos
2nd Feb 2007, 18:31
T&C's awfull?????????? Lets think about this one. EI are doing 900;) hours a year and costantly away from base.Towards Ryan Air they dont really have a fixed roster and were home every night of the week.
Thats why we have q's of people wanting to join us!
Captain Chaos:
What an appropriate name. Muudled thinking if you ask me and no doubt a lonely warrior. Let me pass on the thoughts of a friend on this, when we discussed our different lifestyles.
"Everytime I sneak home & creep into bed at 01.00 trying not to wake the family, my wife wonders if it would be better going back to charter and hotels. Every time I go to bed at 21.00 ready for earlies, asking everyone including the neighbours to be quiet, they say the same thing. No-one has ever thanked me for waking them up at 04,00 as the alarm goes off for work.
So cut the propoganda BS and get a life: or stay where you are and do not! Please do not repeat this c@#p about being home every night. For 5 days it is work & sleep and naff all else. The only thing homely is my own bed, and not dinner with the family or mates down whatever sports club I would like to be at. Don't even think about the pub."
All you other guys must live in a monastary! I hate to think what pilots with young children/babies go through. Give them a hotel every night I would expect. The whole 5 earlies is a nonsense. In the sensible airlines it was 3 earlies in a hotel or 2 earlies at home. Common sense for safety reasons, and that was with a 0600 start not 0530. A hotel at the airport is one thing for an 0600 start. A home 60mins away & 0530 is another completely.
the grim repa
2nd Feb 2007, 21:10
captain chaos,well captain courageous it ain't.
I Would not want to join you in anything.Great attitude.
Have no doubts ladies and gents REPA is here to stay.Just means now that the spoofers and talkers will have to front up with a set of balls and stop hiding behing others to do their fighting for them.
alibaba
2nd Feb 2007, 21:59
Captain Chaos,
It's Ryanair not "Ryan Air". :D :p :E
At least spell the name of the subject of the thread properly. That would be a good start before making daft posts.
When are you guys gonna learn.Unions are dead.
What is wrong with you all anyway.Great salary and home every night. Thats why every body wants to come here.
Can you explain how Unions are dead? As far as I am aware BALPA has the highest amount of members in the organisations history. :confused: It is actively involved in numerous industrial and professional discussions with airlines, organisations, authorities and the government on a number of varying issues. I wouldn't exactly be calling that dead, on the contrary in fact. I would say BALPA is very alive and kicking. I would also hazard a guess that IALPA is probably at or around it's highest membership numbers also.
Captain Chaos, I think that the FR pilots will say being home every night is not an excuse for bullying or harassment in the work place. A good roster doesn't excuse harassment or any continual flagrant contractual breakages either. :ok: It is not a valid argument that breaking the law on certain issues/ practices is deemed acceptable because other people benefit from some of the other possibly good practices that you or a company might undertake. Breaking the law is breaking the law and there is no excuse for it. The reason FR pilots are always home is that the aircraft always return to base. It is the way the business model is set up. It has nothing to do with anything else. You can be sure it doesn't work that way to help please the pilots or crews.
I also do not understand how you get the idea that FR pilots are on a great salary. :confused: As far as I am aware 15,000 euro a year for a new co-pilot doesn't exactly seem like a great salary as a B737 pilot, especially when you take all the things that I believe FR pilots pay for themselves that would be standard costs in any other airline. :\
As to Lee who? I have rarely read any comments or posts that have any evidence or improve the standard of any argument associated with the present FR industrial disputes. I am fairly sure the poster is living in denial and posts on the eventuality or possibility of improving an ego by the expected reaction to inflammatory comments posted. To be blunt, it is a pretty sad existence....:sad:
Leo Hairy-Camel
2nd Feb 2007, 22:14
Look out Captain Chaos!
The Dwarf has sent his two most vicious attack Chihuahua’s to snarl and slobber on your shoelaces. You're possibly unfamiliar with the always-cheerless Rat 5, a pilot who would still find something to whine about even if flying for the Archangel Gabriel himself, and then there's the Dim Repa whom I'm convinced is on some sort of day release program for the perpetually bewildered. Dim Repa goes by the name of Didimus on the Dwarf's high security bitchfest called the REPA website, and is their most prolific author to date. Encouraging news indeed for anyone silly enough to take them seriously.
The Supreme Court in Ireland yesterday delivered a Dwarf spanking of Biblical dimension from which I doubt their few serious elements will emerge for some time, and only then badly savaged. The greatest guarantee of tenure in our business is commercial success. The greatest threat to our jobs as airline pilots is unions in general, and pilot unions in particular. They constitute the only constantly destructive force in the history of our industry. Avoid them like the plague.
alibaba
2nd Feb 2007, 22:33
I believe SW isn’t doing to bad. They are unionised are they not? :confused:
There is no evidence what so ever of any victory to FR in relation to the Supreme Court ruling.
I believe the case has to be reheard by the Labour Court. That isn't exactly a "Dwarf spanking of Biblical dimension" is it now? :ugh: A slight over reaction there..... :ok:
A rehearing is what was ordered and that is the outcome of the judgment. :ooh:
:) ;) :ok: :8 :rolleyes: :O :p :)
Sorry Leo; I'm having the best time of my life. I can't even spell psimystiK
Gigginstown ERC
3rd Feb 2007, 10:54
Leo,
The race is to be re-run.
You wanted the wise men to say you didn't have to run in the race, you do.
1 day closer to what everyone in the equation deserves.
Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit (A wise man does not urinate against the wind)
Leo Hairy-Camel
3rd Feb 2007, 12:14
Hello Giggsey,
As much as I always enjoy your contributions, both public and private, you’re wide of the mark yet again. Had you read Justice Geoghegan’s judgement, and its associated commentary by Justice Fennelly, you will see as I have done that the points in law upon which the case turned were, and are, wrong. No amount of reruns will change that fundamental fact even if the forces of darkness had the stomach for yet another protracted and expensive fight, which, of course, they do not.
I’m curious, though. To which “wise men” do you refer? The hissing nincompoops who so clumsily seek to draw a tattered veil of virtue over their malice, or something more cerebral? No matter, I've always found running distasteful. Far more satisfying to stand and fight...no matter what.
Can't say as I have read the judgment, but I did see the judge quoted in a paper where he said something to the effect that Ryanair's throwing about propaganda and ideology in correspondence was no substitute for dealing with the issues.
To be honest Leo that is an accusation that might well fit yourself!
Boneman
3rd Feb 2007, 13:01
I find it interesting that in the USA, besides the two "legacy carriers" in bankruptcy, only the LCCs are losing money now.
pilot999
3rd Feb 2007, 14:59
Quote :Captain Chaos:
What an appropriate name. Muudled thinking if you ask me and no doubt a lonely warrior. Let me pass on the thoughts of a friend on this, when we discussed our different lifestyles.
"Everytime I sneak home & creep into bed at 01.00 trying not to wake the family, my wife wonders if it would be better going back to charter and hotels. Every time I go to bed at 21.00 ready for earlies, asking everyone including the neighbours to be quiet, they say the same thing. No-one has ever thanked me for waking them up at 04,00 as the alarm goes off for work.
So cut the propoganda BS and get a life: or stay where you are and do not! Please do not repeat this c@#p about being home every night. For 5 days it is work & sleep and naff all else. The only thing homely is my own bed, and not dinner with the family or mates down whatever sports club I would like to be at. Don't even think about the pub."
All you other guys must live in a monastary! I hate to think what pilots with young children/babies go through. Give them a hotel every night I would expect. The whole 5 earlies is a nonsense. In the sensible airlines it was 3 earlies in a hotel or 2 earlies at home. Common sense for safety reasons, and that was with a 0600 start not 0530. A hotel at the airport is one thing for an 0600 start. A home 60mins away & 0530 is another completely.
HAVE YOU CONSIDERED MOVING TO AN AREA WHERE AN ALARM IS NOT REQUIRED. THIS WOULD REMOVE YOUR PROBLEM. And whats with the BS.
What has Barbecued Stake got to do with anything.????????, and what is your problem with monastarys. we have real good bell systems in here., and these really do wake the neighbours up, especially when you hoot the horn in joy on the way to the airport..
cheer up, it could be worse, could be like y..
thebeast
3rd Feb 2007, 15:39
'What is wrong with you all anyway.Great salary and home every night. Thats why every body wants to come here.'
Total dribble Captain Chaos. The majority of FO's especially the new ones are very poorly paid. The main problem is the fact that the salary is so heavily weighted on sector pay and we are simply not doing enough flying at present around 50 hours a month. A whole week of standbys is not unknown. This equates to sector pay of around 600 a month (half sector pay for first 6 months) and a basic of 1100, dosent go far when paying off a type rating!
Hey guys and gals, to an extent Leo and Capt Chaos are a waste of time. I like Leo because he entertains (though I do admit to finding his moral tone a bit much, since he never is prepared to answer inconvenient questions about anything - especially the morality of his hero).
But let's be clear, Chaos cannot be a Ryanair pilot in Dublin and is much more likely to be a direct representative of the "dark side". So, when you give him the time of day you really are implying that you think that giving his propaganda an airing, or an answer, is worthwhile.
Lon More
4th Feb 2007, 01:14
Hope this doesn't lead to the same conclusion as "Key-line management"
bia botal
4th Feb 2007, 08:39
LATEST FACTS TO COME OUT OF THE ARSE OF RYR.
Command up-grade course's starting in march will see new captains on 1/2 basic salaries for the first six months, no doubt that will included the usual 1st April crap, so really 14 months.
MOL recently told the STN ERC,,,,, um we don't think that we can offer the fo's and so's a pay rise this year, in fact we think we may have to give them a pay cut ( sure we have only had 30 consecutive quarter's of unbroken profitability, thats 7 and a 1/2 years for those of you who are so far up MOL that you can't reach a calculator), but the captains, well we have had a bit of a think about it since our last meeting ( where he spent 40 min screaming at the erc for daring to question his decisions, lets co-operate boys and do things my way,,, OR ELSE!!!!)and we think that we can properly match easy jet lowest basic.... (remember this offer is to STN capt. only..... why because he's ****e scared that they might all go orange).
MOL recently to the board in the USA that he expects in the not to distant future to have new capt,s on a basic of as low as 44000 euros,,, how will he do this,,,, simple get the fo's on a basic of 22000 euros (hence the pay reduction mentioned above)and when you upgrade them tell them they will be getting a 100% payrise....................LEO it,s even in your best interest that we get back to the labour court,,, crikey mate otherwise how long till he comes after the brockfield tax haven........
And all this going on whilst he is telling everyone that we are all a happy bunch of campers.... Maybe if people consider this plus all the reductions of the last 3 years and the on going total lack of respect show to all RYR employees people might understand what we are fighting for......... the past is the past.. it,s the future that we should be considering! And i don't mean just RYR. For if we fail it will not be long before other company's follow suit...
Peter Parker
5th Feb 2007, 13:08
He can try it, and will receive the same answer like last year. Simply "NO".:=
I am as well considered for upgrading, but wouldn´t work certainly for 50% salary. If he´s trying it, will continue to work as a F/O, and then will soon leave the company.:cool:
If MOL thinks he can still make aprofit by inviting pax to fly for free, as has been mooted a few times, think how much more profit he can make if he gets the F/O's to fly for nothing. 3 years on line expereince then off to one of the big boys. On the job training, a bit like the self improver instructor route where you hour build for next to nothing in pay. Scary!
The scariest part is some people will do it to get 2000hrs jet and the stepping stone at age 25 to greater heights.
befree
6th Feb 2007, 07:25
Ryanair are flying more empty seats than ever before.
In January the load factor was 71% which is their lowest for 3 years.
The free flights are getting quite expensive with new tax and ryanair now chargeing for each bag. In the 3rd qtr report that brag that average fares are up 7% but then claim they have not added a fuel surchage.
They need to keep it looking as if they are cheap but get a lot more out of each passanger while working staff even harder. One day it will all go very wrong. Either staff will get some protection to take the pressure off or some crash or near miss will force a change.
tankermytanker
6th Feb 2007, 10:11
Ref previous posts:
-Yes, they (SWA) are unionised.
-I'm 99% sure Southwest are still in profit, and have been even longer than ryanair.
RogerIrrelevant69
6th Feb 2007, 10:44
Yeep SWA have been in profit when all around them were failing badly in the many US recessions they have weathered in their 36 year history.
They also have one of the lowest staff turnover rates in the US as they are known to be an excellent employer by insiders and outsiders alike. From all accounts people just don't leave SWA. Just like FR :hmm:
fireflybob
6th Feb 2007, 12:50
Ryanair's profits flying high (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/02/05/bcnryan05.xml)
flyboy1818
6th Feb 2007, 15:02
I think you need to start comparing Ryanair to Valujet and not SWA guys. The story is more similar. Constant cutbacks leading to reduction in safety and staff moral folowed by a massive accident!
blackmail
8th Feb 2007, 19:58
flyboy, the swy guys had an overrun not long ago, where the aircraft landed long on a relative short & snow contaminated rwy & ended up in a gas station.
i don' t know if the aircraft was a write off, but if it wasn' t, it came very close.
sadly, a young boy in a car was killed. this is only to say, unless you have reliable inside information, be careful with company comparisons.
Closing this thread because, as usual, too many people with different agendas and an innate ability to wander so far off topic that it starts to confuse me! :ugh: