Aer Lingus IAD-MAD [Archive]

yaletown

10th Dec 2009, 15:23

I think the passengers would assume they were getting on a United flight with United crews and perhaps for those Spanish passengers, some route language flight attendants, who spoke Spanish from Spain for starters. So you would think it absolutely normal to fly to, let's say, Dublin to Moscow on a LAN (Chile) Airlines flight with French crew after booking your ticket with Aer Lingus? That would make perfect sense to you?

This whole operation is a subcontract under the guises of a codeshare. Both United and Aer Lingus are up to union busting basically and it does not take an expert to see that. Not to mention, the US is in a terrible recession and travel is way down. This is the wrong time to be doing this; United has been grasping at straws to keep market share. If Aer Lingus had been smart, they would have paired up with a carrier that actually is doing well or has a future like Continental. United has a terrible reputation right now for its service, and now that CAL is in the Star Alliance, most will choose to book with them instead. I will be surprised if this venture lasts past Summer 2010.

Other airlines have tried to crew with Americans, and it just does not work. They have a very casual approach to service. Open Skies being the most recent. The Americans could not deal with the rostering system, so most have quit (as they are obsessed with bidding), and the crewing is primarily from Orly. Another example would be the wetlease with USAir back in the 90's for BA. The CDS's that were sent over on that secondment were pulling their hair out, as the Tammy Fay's, Martha Sue's and LaQuita Sherrie LaQuanda's could not wrap their heads around professional customer service and had an interesting take on how to wear the BA uniform. The passenger comment forms from UK passengers indicated they were confused and sometimes could not understand what the crews were saying. I want you to have a vision: Rosie Perez in an Aer Lingus uniform: ' Oh no you didn't. Talk to da hand' This is what will be recruited for Spanish speakers. I embrace these individuals as equal human beings and find diversity to make life worth living, but in the US, if you have flown on an American carrier lately, you will see they struggle with customer service and professionlism. United Airlines has been known to covet its UK based crews as they are the only ones in their work group that is actually professional.

Why do you think British Airways and Virgin have such high percentages of American passengers? They don't like flying their own carriers! LOL They would probably prefer actual Aer Lingus crews to American ones..lol.

Just one more comment on the operation, and it seems silly, but their call out on standby from home is 45 minutes. It takes at least 25 minutes to get from the curb to the gate at IAD (US airport security plus those People Mover shuttles to get out to United's gates), and 15 minutes to get out of the airport perimeter. There is really not housing on the airport grounds, soit makes me wonder if they are familiar with that region, the lack of transport, the issues with parking, and the absolute traffic nightmares that exist. Not to mention, that region is one of the most expensive in the United States, thus most crews opt to commute to IAD. I doubt Aer Lingus would support any commuting, with their rostering system, and I am wondering what interline agreements they have. Most American airlines give crews their pass priveleges immediately at employment; most will not be interested if they have to wait 6 months, especially if the pay is low. I have noticed that Aer Lingus has lifted the deadline for application (after changing it twice). My guess is that they are not getting the professional crews they want.

apaddyinuk

11th Dec 2009, 08:14

Yaletown...has someone had a sense of humour failure????

For those who are interested in this "venture" I suggest you go and check out the many other threads on the Aer Lingus topics in Pprune where you will find it discussed at length and may very well put you off applying for a job with the ailing airline!

yaletown

12th Dec 2009, 20:42

and where's yours? lol ;-)

latinaviation

21st Dec 2009, 21:21

Does OpenSkies still have the NY-based cabin crew?

Sorry for my ignorance, but what is the difference between rostering and bidding?

A former colleague of mine has interviwed with EI for this role. Below are details of the overall compensation, for what it's worth.

Pay scales - there are six "steps" (levels)...
Step 1 - $17,640 CCM, $22,680 Senior
Step 2 - $18,522 CCM, $23,814 Senior
Step 3 - $19,448 CCM, $25,004 Senior
Step 4 - $20,420 CCM, $26,254 Senior
Step 5 - $21,441 CCM, $27,567 Senior
Step 6 - $22,513 CCM, $28,946 Senior

Next to the pay scales, it says "International Allowance - payable for block hours worked on international services, $2 per hour - same rate of payment for CCMs and Seniors."

Commission is 10% of gross sales - international.

General Terms
Annual leave 25 working days (includes all vacation, public holiday, paid sick leave)
Uniform will be provided
Training in the US and Ireland

Benefits
401k
Life Insurance
Health Benefits - medical, prescription, dental
Accidental death/dismemberment
Travel privileges

yaletown

22nd Dec 2009, 00:49

There are just a handful left at JFK for OpenSkies.

heykiddo

24th Dec 2009, 22:08

Lots of talk, but does anyone really know what is going on? First, the compensation for the new F/A's is positively generous especially if you compare it to Virgin America which is really slave labor. Other airlines offer far less than even Virgin is offering. Actually Aer Lingus is offering very fair compensation with 6 scheduled increases. Last time I checked Virgin's second and third year F/A's made the same pay as the first year attendants. If you look at the pay schedule below an important thing to remember is that it is based upon 70 hours of flight time a month or 840 hours a year. That means Aer Lingus is paying about $21/flight hour for a starting junior F/A and $27/flight hour for a senior F/A while Virgin is paying $18/flight hour for an F/A. Also the flying is all international and the allotment for that that is $2/ hour. If you flew 5 trips a month you would make $6,000 additional in tax fee pay. This has nothing to do with union busting. If it did Aer Lingus would be offering much less compensation and benefits then they are. They are looking for professional F/A's that's why they require that you have minimum of 1 year flying to even be considered.

This is a sub-service for United Airlines. When you plug it into the route system (code-share) it makes sense. No airline goes from IAD to MAD. In fact you have to go through another city first to get to MAD. A passenger, who calls United and who wants to get to MAD doesn't care if the carrier is Aer Lingus or United. In fact having a European airline do the route may be an incentive to the traveler.

Why Aer Lingus F/A's would get upset is beyond me. They cannot easily get work permits in the U.S. I suppose that Aer Lingus could open a Madrid base instead of an American base but you have to remember that this is a 'United' flight so it is reasonable that the bulk of the passengers will come from United code-share. Aer Lingus, wanting to capitalize on the open skies agreement, is hiring Americans. It makes sense for Aer Lingus to proceed this way. Now if this doesn't work out, then they will have to let all these crews go simply because there is no way Ireland is going to give work permits to American F/A's when Ireland has high unemployment. Aer Lingus F/A's have nothing to fear and they should be hopeful that this works out. The better Aer Lingus does the better they will do. Their future is tied to the success of Aer Lingus so they better hope that the airline is successful.

apaddyinuk

26th Dec 2009, 16:52

Hey Kiddo,

Im afraid you may have your details somewhat wrong! The cost is significantly less as the crew are paid in Dollars which is not doing well against the Euro at present which is the currency EI generally work with.

Aer Lingus crew and pilots are very upset about this route. The route can easily beoperated by Irish based crwe as a "W" pattern however EI do no even operate out of IAD anymore to Ireland so it would have to be via MAD but the company in their infinite wisdom seem to think that they can make money by having a base with a single aircraft thousands of miles away operating a single route with all its own crew there. That just does not make sense especially at a time when the airline is already on its knees demanding changes from its current employees. That is why crew in Ireland are upset.

This venture is only doomed to failure. OK Aer Lingus will get paid even if the flight is empty but that is all. They will not share in profits and basically it is a lease to United, it does not lead to sustainable growth. Also the uncertainty in working this contract would be very stressful as Aer Lingus will just pull it whenever they like! I certainly would not want to be applying for this and would recommend everyone just avoid it!

yaletown

26th Dec 2009, 19:10

What Heykiddo is not understanding is that Aer Lingus is doing this as a means to an end. What he/she is not understanding is that the long term goal for them is to break the Irish unions by creating bases abroad, and perhaps relocating their corporate headquarters. Did he miss the articles about Aer Lingus trying to open BOS and JFK bases, and having them do DUB as an overnight there and back, so as to avoid paying EU allowances to these crews? Cheap cheap cheap. Essentially this is scab labour , or atleast that is how we in the industry perceive it. The IAD base is a pilot project in that they are testing the waters, both Aer Lingus and United. Ryanair crews from Eastern block countries perhaps? Well, this is exactly what Aer Lingus is doing, only with America. $17,000 a year to start in the DC area, the county that rivals Orange County in terms of cost of living? That would be a poverty wage basically; rent alone for a crash pad that you would share with 10 other crew runs $400 a month. I wonder what Heykiddo will think when US airlines do an open skies agreement with the Phillipines and start crewing from there, where they make about $100 a month. Suddenly this person may not be so keen on what Aer Lingus is up to. One has to look at the big picture, do the research, and understand what is evolving. This is not good.

Just a side note here, United is doing this as a code share to get around ALPA. By subcontracting Aer Lingus in a CPA type agreement would be in violation of their scope clause where an outside carrier can only operate a 70 seater jet max. This is why Aer Lingus shows this route on their website and will be selling tickets. If it were a true capacity purchase agreement where Aer Lingus got paid empty or full, only United would be selling tickets, and of course, United would be forced to shut it down by ALPA as it would be in violation of the scope clause. This is why this deal is so devious as it is clearly a union busting move by both airlines. Apparently ALPA and the AFA are working to block it.

It just makes me angry to see our whole profession being dismantled so that the CEO's can walk away with so much cash. I disdain people that think it is perfectly ok for airlines to exploit its frontline workers financially, so that their managment can have multi-million dollar bonuses. It is sick.

apaddyinuk

27th Dec 2009, 06:28

Yaletown.....BLOODY BRILLIANT POST! :ok:

Skyguy2

29th Dec 2009, 06:53

okay but lets look at this in the USA broke traditional way. There are alot of furloughed FA's or "cabin crew" here. There are even FA's leaving their airline for this opportunity. What EI pays here is double the amount you would start off at 1st year at a mainline carrier here. Secondly bidding isnt wonderful when your going to be on reserve for half of your entire life! This is creating jobs.. granted to the Euro its chump change but to the US its not that bad. Many people are jobless or losing thier jobs and this may be the opportunity that comes along as thier saving grace. To others its an opportunity that they may just want to embark on because of thier passion to fly. Either way its opportunity and an open door being that noone except regionals are hiring at this point, and wont be for a very long time. So the fact that UA fa's are upset EI crews are upset dont make a bit of difference to someone that needs a job and income to survive. Its all about survival and anyone in these peoples situations would be doing the same exact thing, and would have had thier application in there in a hot second with the rest! Its NOT scab pay unfortunetly and sadly its expected pay here. I barely came close to breaking 16k with per diem, and being IAD based with three airports to cover on oncall status. 17640 not including per diem is a dream to some over here across the pond! granted we are very much back in the day here still. Yes it is sad to see the CEO's pocket everything. Look what Glenn Tilton at United did to his company. Took away all the pension then turned around and gave him and his executives million dollar bonuses. After HIS airline was used in terrorist attacks, and his people were murdered at work that day, and still to this day UAL management just plain old sucks although unles Glenn's messages are always "stay United" please more like stay seperated. But what can we do about it? NOTHING! The only thing the union can do is fan fires and instigate employees to join along onboard the complain train and then what.. still nothing. To me Unions are just as worthless as the CEO's! We have been trying to get Uncle Glen at United out the door for the longest time. Wearing bracelets saying "Glens gotta go" the union even flew a place with the same message across his penthouse suite in Chicago... Ahem..... He's still here rolling in that dough! haha I will agree that sadly US crews really do need to work on thier professionalism. Really US crews really need to follow the EU crews leads. Hopefully EI trains the new hires to thier standards and dont let them slack off into what we see today over here.

yaletown

29th Dec 2009, 16:44

Comair pays more. It is a US regional, and they were hiring not too long ago. (in your 3rd year you would be at $26 a flight hour which if you worked an 85 hour month, you would gross $30k that year without per diem..) Do your research; you are throwing out a pathetic excuse that no one is buying as you are trying to justify something you know is wrong in your gut. Many American carriers pay much more after you hold out with them for 5 years or more, and you know that. The first 5 years at any airline are tough. This gig will never pay what the cap out rates at Delta, CAL and UAL are paying, not to mention Skywest and Comair. You are knowingly taking this position, realising that this will affect the lives of Irish crews, who will now be unemployed. Regardless of being desperate, you are setting a bench mark in the industry by taking this job. You are telling airlines that they can pay like ****e and people like you will line up for a pile of it. You are not seeing the big picture. They are using you to see how they can undermine current cabin crew and pilot jobs. Get it? Be patient, get another job and wait for the right flying position to come along. Otherwise, accept that you are a form of scab labour.

Two-Tone-Blue

29th Dec 2009, 18:33

It's all a big deal, but at the end of the day you have a job or you don't. I'm well aware there are lot of 'deals' going on, and some of those don't seem great. But, honestly, it's that or MaccyD's or Wendy's.

Bite the bullet, and think about how many airlines have gone under over the last 18 months or so. You want to be an FA? So do it ... or join the Army, or be a brain surgeon. Come on, people; it's a hard world out there.

I REALLY miss MaxJet ;)

yaletown

30th Dec 2009, 02:24

What I think, and I would venture to say most crew would think, is that by you taking jobs like this, they soon will make all of our jobs low paying. At that point, one will have to go work at McDonald's. Are you striving to be an airline professional, or is this just a summer teenage job for you? I blame people that take these jobs for helping ruin our careers. If all new hires said no to inhuman wages, they would be forced to raise the bar to get the right people.

What is wrong with patience and waiting? A lot of us had to wait through the end of the 80's and almost into the mid 90's before the good airlines hired. Do you think we all went and worked for some crap fly by night airline? No we didn't because we had self respect, patience, and we waited for the best opportunity. We worked crap ground jobs for years until we got the right airline position. Don't be so bloody selfish. We all know there are jobs out there in the States that can pay the bills. If one is thinking this scab job is going to even remotely pay any bills, they are sadly mistaken. McDonald's may actually pay more, and I think that puts it all into perspective.

apaddyinuk

30th Dec 2009, 04:28

To be honest... there is no job security for anyone who applies for this contract anyway. I will eat my had if we are still hearing about this base in a few years time!

IFLy4Free

31st Dec 2009, 13:58

Does EI hire by base rather than hiring and getting assigned base during training? Also, are the cabin crew either long haul or short haul vs flying all the routes?

heykiddo

31st Dec 2009, 21:36

apaddyinuk,

Actually you are a bit misinformed. I have flown for over 22 years and the pay and benefits offered in this market, considering what other airlines are offering, is generous. I have read about the MAD route and I have attended the interview for the F/A position. The Aer Lingus people are all very nice and very excited about this route.

The route is a sub-service for United and the pax which board will be mostly Americans. We are not talking about Irish folks boarding out in IAD. This just simply fills a hole in United's schedule and they are simply taking advantage of the 'open skies' agreement to fill it. Whether it works or not is anybodies guess. But a successful outcome is in both Aer Lingus and United's interests.

If you work for either of these airlines you too should be hoping for their success. Neither company can continue losing money, and they need to find ways to increase revenue. This appears to be a route which is not fully served and at least they are attempting to move forward. The status quo is not an option. 'Open Skies' agreement is here, it is a reality. Things ARE going to change. It is important for all airlines to take advantage of this opportunity or end up on the losing end. I applaud United and Aer Lingus for moving forward and yes, taking a risk.

yaletown

31st Dec 2009, 23:42

We'll wait for your report about how generous they are with that 45 minute call out and the $17k a year for the junior crew. When one's average cheque per month is around $2000, let us know how generous you feel they are. I am not sure what airlines you have been looking at, or perhaps only the very low paying airlines have offerred you a position, but as mentioned earlier, even regionals like Comair and Skywest have a greater long term scale. Good luck, but as Aer Lingus is literally struggling for its survival, I think you are being foolish. Ofcourse the recruiters were being nice; are you so naive to think they are going to paint the real picture for you? I think I am beginning to understand why they chose America for this venture......

I do not think outsourcing work to other countries is the answer. I do not think it is ethical for them to start this IAD base as a beginning, and then later adding on DUB, because you know this is what is going to happen. Karma has a great way of getting back to you, and if you get this ball rolling, you are just asking for trouble. After time walking through Dulles in that uniform will be a walk of shame for you, as many we be glaring. We can thank you for helping company's get rid of their current staff and outsource people like you. Thanks for helping ruin the Cabin Crew career!

heykiddo

1st Jan 2010, 01:13

Yaletown,

If you have ever flown for an airline you should know its what you get paid per flight hour plus per diem and benefits. Aer Lingus is offering $21/fl. hr to start with and 6 step increases each with about a dollar an hour increase. In your seventh year you will be making $27/fl. hr. based upon 70 flight hours per month. NOT 85 hours. You should know that if you do 85 flight hours per month on a regional air carrier than you will NEVER be home. UP, Down, UP, Down all day long. With Aer Lingus you get about 15 block hours per pairing. 5 pairings a month and you are out of there. PLUS international per diem! And the benefits are terrific. This is the best offer I have seen. The Airline I worked for for 17 years went bankrupt. I was making about $40/fl. hour at the end. When ATA started they were a discount charter airlines. There wages ended up so high they couldn't compete as a discount airline. Sure I would like to make $40/hr again. But I realize that we live in a different economic climate and I for one think Aer Lingus is offering a good starting salary, with scheduled increases. Virgin America starts at $18/fl.hr and has NO scheduled wage increases and I can tell you they are having NO trouble finding people to work for that. Look at there route structure...... it keeps on growing and growing. And it isn't growing slowly, it is moving faster and faster. For what they are willing to pay their air crews they will eventually push United and American and Delta out of business. American airlines cannot compete against that kind of economics.

If you were against 'open skies' (the agreement between Europe and U.S.) you should have made your voice known before. Now it is to late and it's here and you can not hold back the sands of time. If Aer Lingus wasn't doing this other airlines would and eventually will. In fact you are going to see much more of this before its over. And if American airlines want to expand in Europe they will follow the same formula. If they choose not to grow then you will see the REAL discount airlines (Virgin America @ $18/fl. hr and others such as Jet blue and Ryan in Europe) move in and really eat your lunch.

Kama? Give me a break. What you are saying is that YOU don't like it, therefore it must be bad. It doesn't work like that. This is neither good nor bad, wrong nor right. It is just two things....... economics and survival. You can fight the future all you want but change is inevitable. Change is here and change is now.

IFLy4Free

1st Jan 2010, 16:21

Yaletown is from CANADA....why would he/she care about the USA/Ireland?

I am opposed to union busting, crossing picket lines etc. But I am not opposed to making money for UA and EI, trying new things and getting Americans off welfare, unemployment, food stamps and out of section 8 housing. American taxpayers pay for section 8, food stamps and welfare...the more people that get off government assisted programs the better the economy will be.

If the UA/EI venture lasts 6 months, at least there will be money for folks who need it. Personally I would not apply for this type of flying but I am not going to put down those who do.

In the long run it is about profits, getting the airlines out of financial trouble. There are no scabs here. Do I wish that UA was doing this flying with a 777, of course, they used to do it! Times are tough everywhere.

ditzyboy

1st Jan 2010, 23:06

This is an issue most close to my heart, being a career flight attendant (airlines must HATE that term!). The degeneration of flight attendant conditions is a worldwide phenomenon.

Yaletown does make some valid points, however I believe that the answer lies not with the the individual (karma - WTF?!), but the the corporate consciousness of the company concerned. It's finding the balance between corporate needs and what is best for the company's culture.

I work for Qantas Airways Short Haul division (although the company now refers to us as 'domestic' crew, yet we still operate limited international flights and will again operate more in the future). Qantas is run as a cutthroat business and the niceties, or what should happen (to which Yaletown elludes) does not come into it.

On given Short Haul flight, you can have crew working any one of eight(!) separate pay and conditions. Up to six of these contracts can be on any one flight! Three of these contracts are not even employed by a Qantas company and are casual labour. While I detest the use of external casual labour hire (especially to the degree to which Qantas has used it!) I cannot blame any labour hire employee or wish ill karma upon them!

Sadly this sort of thing is the way of the future for airlines to survive. It is getting harder for the legacies to make money and these airlines need to find ways to exploit laws and legislation. It does not make it right, per se, but it is not illegal. Rather than fight it (like Yaletown), one simply needs to accept the fact and help the push towards an equalisation between the diffferent contracts. That is where I believe karma comes in to play. I am on the second highest contract in terms of renumeration. My colleagues, on the highest contract, voted in a new contract that sees a particular allowance cut for anyone that started (or transfers to Short Haul division) after a particular date. Is this Qantas' fault? Or the fault of my colleagues who sought to protect their own interest by actively voting in a contract that saw others employed under what is, essentially, inferior conditions? This is not what is happening in this circumstance.

Whether you are an 18 (minimum age for cabin crew in Australia) year old wannabe who just desperately wants to realise the dream of becoming the flight attendant or someone with more experience (heykiddo) who can appreciate the airline's position and still wants to be employed under such a contract I believe it is their right pursue employment under these conditions. Are these inferior to the conditions offered by the legacy's 'mainline' crew? Yes! However it is the airline that is legally exploiting the situation. The candidates for these position are doing no wrong.

As mentioned I support the general view of Yaletown with respect to what the airlines are doing (lowering conditions by using separate companies and the 'churn and burn' mentality). And it saddens me that airlines have gone down this path. But to victimise individuals is short-sighted and narrow-minded, in my opinion.

What is wrong with patience and waiting? A lot of us had to wait through the end of the 80's and almost into the mid 90's before the good airlines hired. Do you think we all went and worked for some crap fly by night airline? No we didn't because we had self respect, patience, and we waited for the best opportunity. We worked crap ground jobs for years until we got the right airline position. Don't be so bloody selfish.

This is where you lose me, Yaletown. What is patience and waiting going to achieve for heykiddo? Really. These conditions WILL exist with or not heykiddo takes up the position. Someone else will! Your words it a nerve with me. Your views make no sense in the world in which we live!

Congratulations heykiddo. I hope that you are successful in your application and wish you all the best!

IronWalt

2nd Jan 2010, 00:30

"After time walking through Dulles in that uniform will be a walk of shame for you, as many we be glaring. We can thank you for helping company's get rid of their current staff and outsource people like you. Thanks for helping ruin the Cabin Crew career!"

Ohhhh Bull Stuff!!!!!

Quit Whining. The Regionals and Commuter Airlines have ruined this industry for many years now. And what do you people do about it? Nothing!!!

I view Mesa, Colgan, ComAir and others with disdain as I see them in the terminal. Do they care. No. They continue to do their job for the low wages and work rules that they accepted.

I expect this EI deal to go through and be successful in reducing the airline career even further. And there is NOTHING that you or your unions will do about it.

So until you have a solution and are willing to stand up for yourselves on the current threat of career erosion, go talk tough to the wall.

yaletown

2nd Jan 2010, 00:36

Can you please keep your discussion professional IronWalt? Do not appreciate that last statement about me being 'a tough talking pansy'. Thank you. But I do appreciate you editing that statement. Cheers.

Oh and FYI, if ALPA cannot do anything about this, I suppose we can then say that pilots do not stand up for themselves? I doubt that. I do not agree with you. Regionals fly under scope clauses. They are not operating heavies and taking long haul routes from them, and in other countries than the US, regionals have actually been integrated back into the mainline operation, like for example SAS.
But the USA is a very unique place.

heykiddo

2nd Jan 2010, 00:59

I am sorry to say I disagree with you. This whole situation is a direct result of the elimination of the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) during the Reagan administration. That was done to foster more competition in the airline industry and to open flying up to more people. Well now we have the competition and the airlines and the people that work there have to stay alive and to stay financially afloat. We have to deal with the new system so we cannot sit on our hands and hope that things will improve.

What yaletown wants us to do is to suffer so that we preserve his way of living and especially his salary. Eventually Virgin or some other airline will realize that they can price You out of the market and then you will see what it's like. The discount airlines are advancing and they will eventually destroy every American airline which cannot compete. Virgin airlines pay, for 70 flight hours a month, is about 15K per year with no scheduled increases in pay. How is United going to survive. Should United struggle to keep the salaries of their people? If they do they will die and all the jobs that they have will be lost. Which is the more honorable road to go down. Preserve the past at all costs and then to go down in flames or to yield to the winds of change and attempt to preserve jobs and keep families together.

Yaletown lives in the past and is willing to sacrifice us for himself. Bravo Yaletown.

ditzyboy

2nd Jan 2010, 01:47

But the USA is a very unique place.

No, it is isn't. Or am I missing something?

apaddyinuk

2nd Jan 2010, 02:43

Kiddo,

I hate to tell you this but although I am no longer employed my Aer Lingus I am far more aware of this "exercise" (which is how it is considered by many in Aer Lingus head office) then you could ever be.

It has also been whispered that the new CEO who joined the company just a few months ago is not exactly warming to this venture. Already a scary prospect for those like you wishing to apply for this role!

I appreciate you trying to remain upbeat about this but you must also see it for what it really is. It is not exactly in Aer Lingus best interests to make this venture work. As a stand alone entity so seperated from the main Aer Lingus operation yes of course it is important to remain profitable but in the grand scheme of things....It could turn into a massive white elephant! Just look at BA and its OpenSkies farce!

And USD17K is not exactly an amazing salary. I can assure you that those based in ROI are living a hell of a lot better off then you could! It is a pure example that there really are desperate people out there willing to work for peanuts when infact they are probably worth far more!!!!

heykiddo

2nd Jan 2010, 07:18

I have been out of work since my former unionized airline went bankrupt. I receive emails from my union, the AFA, all the time. I found this job because of them. They even told us where to apply. It is ironic that the union directed me to this job. This job does not take any work away form other UNION people. Heck, I AM THE UNION. This whole discussion is ludicrous. This is a new route. No Union members in Ireland or in the US are going to lose their job because of us. Aer Lingus and United are simply trying to take advantage of the change in rules due to 'open skies'. This is simply smart business. You either change and adapt or be eaten by your competition. Both United and Aer Lingus have had financial problems. You do not resolve those problems by just sitting on your hands. You have to act. Taking action is always a risk but burying your head in the sand is sure death.

As far as the pay is concerned it is always amazing to me that those who are negative always refer to the lowest figure that you could make. By my calculations a first year F/A with Aer Lingus will make between 23-25K a year. By the fifth year we will be at 30K a year. Sure I would like to earn more but I would rather fly half a month doing long hauls for 30K than riding up and down all month long at some regional airline. You seem to forget that this pay is based up 70 fl hrs a month. If you fly more, which is easy to to in long haul flying, you can make a lot more.

Neither you or Yaletown are even addressing the real threat to your jobs. It is Virgin America. Virgin F/A's make (based on 70 fl. hrs a month) About $15K a year with less per diem than Aer Lingus offers. As I have said before, Virgin, Jet Blue and Ryanair are the real threats and they will eat your lunch. Air Lingus is offering the best pay that I have seen so far for the type of flying I want to do. No one is asking you to like it. It really doesn't matter what you think because the world has changed and this is the new reality. Unless the American government starts the CAB again competition is here and it is going to get a lot worse. If you really feel so strongly about this write your congressman or the two of you can picket up and down Pennsylvania Avenue. Do something positive to support your beliefs instead of being so negative. It won't help, but at least you will have followed your convictions instead of trying to get someone who wants this job to throw themselves under the bus to preserve your way of life. Of course that won't help either because there are 50 more behind me and 100 more behind them. A lot of my friends from the airlines are still out of work after nearly two years and the local hardware store pays a lot less than Aer Lingus. There are not a lot of jobs around the allow you to work for half a month for 24K the first year. I consider myself one of the lucky ones. Many of my friends from the airlines have run through unemployment and have no job prospects. Aer Lingus looks pretty good if the alternative is flipping burgers. But you two, who are extremely lucky that you still have good paying jobs, are so smug and self righteous that you are willing to sacrifice other people to justify your own needs. It should be of no concern to you if I take this job or not unless of course you have ulterior motifs. And of course you do. You want to maintain the status quo because its in your financial interests. You are walking around with blinders on. The status quo is already gone. It got blown away under the Reagan administration and it is gone forever. No one is listening to you two anymore. You have become antiquated and in the process you have become irrelevant.

heykiddo

2nd Jan 2010, 16:38

apaddyinuk

The civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) controlled what an airline could charge for a flight. As such airline wages began to rise to extremely high levels in the late 70's. Reagan disbanded the CAB and opened American skies to competition. Airlines began to set there own prices and the skies opened to all kinds of discount airlines. What is happening today is directly related to the elimination of the CAB and the condition of US airlines is a direct result of that single act.

You don't know the future, and the last time I checked no one does. You think that I must be naive simply because I don't agree with you. After all you KNOW better. You are a EUROPEAN. You USED to work for Aer Lingus. You act like you are the font of knowledge coming down from on high to impart your wisdom to the poor unknowing masses of the world. Maybe you will be right about what will happen on the other hand maybe you will be wrong. You might think about having a little humility. No one knows the future.......... not even you.

yaletown

2nd Jan 2010, 19:38

Heykiddo, I am not trying to make this personal at all, but will tell you, I have had to start over in the recent past having flown for an airline that went bankrupt within the last 5 years. You are making assumptions about people you know little of. I am not on a cushy wage at all, but I am willing to fight against outsourcing workers to ensure that this job remains a career.

As it stands, it is becoming contract work, much like seasonal charter flying. If Aer Lingus were keeping its Irish workers and all was remaining the same, and this was supplementary and always separate, I would be all for it. Unfortunately, it is not, and you are knowingly taking work away from these people. We all want growth for our companies so we as workers (and you do realize sir that the Aer Lingus crews have taken big cuts and make less than a senior flight attendant in the States) can share in the company's success; how would you feel if you had sacraficed for your company, held out, were on a crap wage, and then they went ahead and hired a bunch of overseas workers, and you were getting laid off? Those are the times and we should all just accept that? Do you personally know any Aer Lingus cabin crew? Apaddyinuk I am assuming does, and I do. You need to get the facts from those that are getting buggerred. So when Aer Lingus lays you off, and they tell you it is because you Americans are just getting too expensive and not giving them what they want, you will just say, 'oh that is ok. this is the airline industry now. I need to accept that if I want to do this, I must accept zero job security and give them concessions whenever they ask.' ? As much as I hate this expression, 'it takes two to tango', meaning, the company is knowingly manipulating people into this deal, but the applicants are also agreeing to it. But alas, sometimes we cannot see the forest for the trees.

If you are looking for the general airline world to endorse what you are doing, forget about it as it will never happen. I read the American blogs too, and the flight attendants there, from all airlines are calling this a scab operation and are very clear about their resentment to it. The odds are not in favour of you people. I agree with apaddyhunk as well that this is short lived. Look at the protectionist movement that is going on in Washington right now. I am sure ALPA's lobbyists are talking to the right people and their connections on Capital Hill as we speak. ALPA gets a lot of what they want.

Oh, (and I will not support this at all), but Canada is currently entering into complete open skies with Europe. In Canada, the dollar is less and companies do not have to pay for health insurance. Not to mention, many of us are bilingual and multilingual. It would not be hard to have a flight that originated in YYZ, stopped in a US city (JFK) pick up the American lot then fly on to DUB for example. How are you going to feel when these same companies who are wooing you now, suddenly dump you for us up North where they can save even more money? What goes around comes around. Better to stop it now than let it get out of hand.

IFLy4Free

2nd Jan 2010, 19:53

It is not a "cross the picket line" operation, there is no picket line. EI would have to hire flight attendants in MAD if they did not hire in IAD. They would have to change their entire schedule to use a wide body from DUB-MAD-IAD-MAD-DUB for a 5 or 6 day trip if they used their current flight attendants.

I do not like what is happening but for me it is just life, and part of what the airlines feel they need to do to keep out of bankruptcy.

Personally I would not apply for this but others are certainly entitled to do what they wish as far as employment.

At this point it is probably a 'wait and see" as to what happens....

Also, ALPA is not doing anything about this.... they are not happy but there is nothing happening in DC on this issue.

yaletown

2nd Jan 2010, 20:00

European crews do up to 16 day trips on long haul, that is why they are allowed to have suit cases. Doing a 6 day trip would be nothing for them.

Talk to your fellow Americans then as they are the ones calling it that. Without getting into semantics, does it really matter? If the masses perceive it as that, one who is doing the work will be treated like a scab anyways. Apathy is no excuse; you cannot look back and whinge that things are bad for you when you sat back and did not fight when the changes were taking place. The reason why things are such a mess right now is because people sat back, said 'that is life' and let very shrewd companies lobby hard to get rid of regulation, because they knew the general public would be apathetic.

TightSlot

2nd Jan 2010, 21:23

Just so you know...

'Scab" is not an acceptable word in here, or indeed, anywhere. Suggest that you all find more intelligent ways to make your point. No further warnings, and please note, this is not a matter for debate - so don't.

EISNN

3rd Jan 2010, 16:17

HeyKiddo. I'm afraid to say that you are wrong when you say that you are not taking jobs from any union members in the Republic of Ireland. EI have had a long haul based crew in SNN for 16 years and their last longhaul aircraft is now going to IAD to give people outside the ROI a job.

I'm not getting into the whole reasons as to why who or how but that is in fact that ACTUAL FACTS. 120 people have been told they have no jobs in March in SNN. and another 160+ crew in both ORK AND DUB and yet both longhaul and shorthaul fleets are continuing to increase but not to the benefit of the home base crews.

apaddyinuk

3rd Jan 2010, 22:58

Heykiddo....

I suggest you take all that is being said in and think about it. You are qiuck to go on the defensive but you are not quick to actually stop and think "is this going to work"! You are right, no one can foretell the future but people can see the warning signs everywhere!

heykiddo

4th Jan 2010, 05:53

Wrong.

IAD is getting a new A330 A/C. Sorry about that but facts are facts.

As I said I am Union too. The Union (AFA) turned me on to this job and told me where to apply. Sorry about that why don't you take it up with the Union. No union people will lose a job because this is a new route. Sorry again but facts are facts. Interestingly enough this venture may well quash Ryanair from taking control of Aer Lingus. You realize that Aer Lingus expects Ryanair to make another run for Aer Lingus as early as later this month. If United and Aer Lingus get legally tied up that could thwart Ryanair form pursuing Aer Lingus. What do you think will happen to the union jobs if Ryanair gets ahold of Aer Lingus. I can tell you that your standard of living won't go up. This venture may turn out to be a blessing for Aer Lingus. Either way I am going to fly ............ so sorry. Smile!

latinaviation

4th Jan 2010, 11:21

Just a point of clarification on EI's A330s. The A330 for this JV will not be new. Aer Lingus has 3 A330-200s (the type to be used on this route), all built between 1999 and 2007. Two are on the ground at DUB right now, including the one that will be used for this route. The next new A330 Aer Lingus is due to receive will be a -300 in April 2010.

yaletown

6th Jan 2010, 20:22

This is an interesting article to read regarding this new arrangement:

What are Scope Clauses and Why Are People Fighting Over Them?
By Brett Snyder Nov. 23rd 2009

"In January 2010, nearly every single one of United Airlines’ (UAUA) labor contracts officially becomes amendable (http://industry.bnet.com/travel/10002077/uniteds-labor-negotiations-platform-explains-what-it-wants-for-employees/). The rhetoric from both sides is bound to ramp up as we get closer, and you’re going to hear a lot about scope clauses, particularly during the pilot negotiations. Why? And what is a scope clause anyway?
First, for you non-airline folks, I should explain the “amendable” piece. Normal labor law doesn’t apply to the airline industry. Instead, airlines are governed by the Railway Labor Act (http://www.nmb.gov/documents/rla.html). Under this act, contracts don’t expire but rather become amendable. This is to help prevent work stoppages in an industry that is considered vital to the nation. But once it becomes amendable, the negotiations really heat up on a new contract, and it can take ages to resolve.
Usually, you hear about pay as being the hot button issue, but this time around at United and elsewhere in the industry, the pilots are really focusing on scope. So what is scope?
A scope clause is what defines what type of flying can be done by pilots that aren’t employed by the airline. Historically, this has been primarily used to limit the scope of flying that the regional carriers can do under the mainline’s brand name.
Ever wonder why American Eagle (AMR) has so few 70 seaters buzzing around? And why Continental Express has no jets larger than 50 seats? It’s all because of the scope clause. The scope clause can not only limit the number of seats but it can also limit the total number of airframes flown by others. In some cases, there is a ratio set up so that the number of express airplanes can grow as long as the number of mainline planes grow as well.
At United, the situation is particularly acute since the airline has been rapidly expanding regional flying. For example, in October, mainline flying was down 6.8 percent while regional flying was up 14.7 percent. United recently finished retiring 100 mainline planes without a replacement planned. And just to put a cherry on top of this thing, they announced earlier this year a new partnership with Aer Lingus (http://crankyflier.com/2009/01/23/united-and-aer-lingus-earn-a-cranky-jackass-for-plan-which-could-see-their-crews-disappear/).
So why is that a big deal? Well, the plan is for United to market the flights as its own but Aer Lingus will do the flying. Sounds like a codeshare, right? Wrong. These will be airplanes that Aer Lingus pulls out of their own system to fly from a United hub (Washington/Dulles) to a third city (Madrid). They will staff the airline with US-based, non-union workers in order to keep costs low. This is effectively United bringing the regional model to long haul, widebody flying. So United pilots are being squeezed from both ends.
Naturally, United’s employees are scared about this. They can fight for all the pay raises they want, but it doesn’t help if all the flying is done by someone else. So you will see scope clauses coming front and center in the near future as these and other negotiations begin to really heat up."

Tags: Aer Lingus (http://resources.bnet.com/topic/aer+lingus.html), Clause (http://resources.bnet.com/topic/clause.html), United Airlines (http://resources.bnet.com/topic/united+airlines.html), Scope Clause (http://resources.bnet.com/topic/scope+clause.html), Free Trade (http://resources.bnet.com/topic/free+trade.html), Strategy (http://resources.bnet.com/topic/strategy.html), Finance (http://resources.bnet.com/topic/finance.html), Management (http://resources.bnet.com/topic/management.html), Brett Snyder (http://resources.bnet.com/topic/brett+snyder.html)

In addition to writing BNET's travel industry blog, Brett Snyder also pens the award-winning consumer travel blog, Cranky Flier (http://crankyflier.com/). You can follow him on ******* under the name crankyflier (http://www.*******.com/crankyflier).

Quoted from BNET.com

latinaviation

7th Jan 2010, 10:02

Looks like it is formalized and may even expand, as per a release from Aer Lingus Investor Relations (I believe the code share calls for up to 3 A330s):

United Airlines Code Share Agreement

Dublin, 07 January 2010: Aer Lingus Group plc (“Aer Lingus”) today formalized its codeshare agreement with United Airlines to jointly operate scheduled service between Washington Dulles and Madrid, Spain. The service will launch March 28th and it is anticipated that additional routes may be made available for sale during 2010 to commence operation in Summer 2011.

Both carriers will equally share the commercial and operational benefits and risk, with Aer Lingus managing the operational aspects of the new partnership services and United Airlines taking responsibility for managing revenue generation. The Partnership route structure will be sold under both Aer Lingus and United Airlines codes and will leverage both parties’ network
capabilities.

yaletown

7th Jan 2010, 11:55

I just find this interesting that all this is coming about as UAL heads into contract negotiations with crews. What saddens me is that other airlines may start this stunt with not so good carriers i.e. Asia routes. To me this seems like some sort of spawn derived from airline alliances (Star, Oneworld) where flying is shared, and the CPA operation of regional flying. Bring it together and this is what you have. Are your staff getting too old and and an inconvenience? Sick of actually paying crews a fair wage? Do you not wish you could substitute ****e for their crew meals? No problem...at Aer Outsource Lingus we will be glad to hire people at little or no cost to take all your labour problems away!

The main reason why I do not want this to work is because I just do not want it to become a trend that will ruin all of our careers. I just get so frustrated with people taking this job saying it is the new airline industry. What they do not realize is that they are taking the career out of it and turning it into a minimum wage job for all of us. I could care less who they are working for; I do not like the precedent they are setting, under the guises of 'oh poor me..I can't get a job', especially when traditional paying airlines are hiring. They are walking right into a trap set by airline mgmt to get around their labour force. And these new hires are basically saying, 'Give us crap and we will eat it. We will do anything to fly', giving other airlines the idea that they do not need to treat us well at all anymore as there are people out there who will even pay them to fly.

There used to be a lot of jobs in North America that paid well and did not require a masters degree. Manufacturing and different trades positions afforded one a decent life. Well, our lovely governments, pressured/lobbied by corporations, signed into the global marketplace. So as we have noticed, we are still getting a lot of the same products (not made to last) at an ok quality, but when looking at the marks on it, it usually is made in a developing country. Corporations simply wanted a global marketplace so they could cheap out on labour and increase their profits; developing countries were eager to get cash and exploit their workers in the process. So all those jobs we used to have, are done by migrant labourers overseas (hardly a career for a lot of them). The only people who have truly benefited from it are those that run the show, not you and I. Now airlines are setting out in this direction, and I fear someday, there will be fewer and fewer cabin crew jobs for us, or atleast ones that afford us to pay rent, mortgage, food and car bills. It is not as if we all make a fortune right now. These individuals taking these positions are opening the door for it to get a whole lot worse; they do not get it and cannot see the next outsourcing points will be Eastern Europe (already happening) and Asia, as this model will be used as an example for others. It is like a lab experiment.

apaddyinuk

8th Jan 2010, 00:20

HeyKiddo,

I really dont know who you think you are slagging me off like that. Totally inappropriate. As said before I have no interests in Aer Lingus, couldnt care less but I do have some knowledge that could be very healthy for you but you just want to slag me off. Says it all really!

FURIOUS!

SeenItAll

11th Jan 2010, 16:43

This is an unfortunate thread, because nearly all of the participants are correct (and very articulate). Heykiddo has accurately adduced the real culprit -- intensifying competition due to a drop in entry barriers into the airline business (but with one minor correction, the disbanding of the CAB and deregulation of the US airline business began in 1978 under Carter, not Reagan). Yaletown has correctly identified that this Aer Lingus/UAL venture will further pressure FA wages. And apaddyinuk is likely right that Aer Lingus may quickly bail out of this venture and seek even more discounted staffing costs.

The key answer that is not provided is whether there is something that can to done to stop this downward spiral of wages and working conditions. Simply boycotting the EI/UA venture is unlikely to have much of an effect. Rather, from the point-of-view of this SLF (who happens to be an economist), the key thing that needs to be done to improve FA conditions is for the industry (and FAs) to demonstrate that better FA wages will provide SLF with service that SLF are willing to pay extra for. I, for one, am willing to pay a premium if I can expect to get a better grade of service from flight or cabin crew. But people in the airline industry need to put their heads together to figure out how this might be done. Of course it is also possible that I am in the minority, and the nearly all SLF just want the absolute cheapest ticket with no regard to the quality of service. If this is the case, there may be no hope. But I hope not.

Before I am flamed, let me conclude this post by again observing that the main contributors have been incredibly articulate in presenting the issues -- and I have little doubt that they will be successful in any venture they pursue.