KLMuk trouble at mill!! [Archive]

Long Haul

19th Apr 2002, 19:59

buzz boy,

As a member of the VNV, I object to your characterisation of myself and my fellow union members as greedy and malicious. I also feel that your grievances and threats of industrial action are inappropriate considering that the negotiations between KLM and the VNV over the amalgamation of the KLC and KLMuk flight operations have not even begun. No one has tried to screw you and in my opinion no one will. In your post, I believe that you were trying to quote from a newsletter that the VNV bestuur (board of directors) sent to it’s members. I believe that this is a more complete English translation of the relevant section:

“In KLM’s view, regional operations are performed by KLC and KLM uk. These both have recently been placed under the supervision of one person. KLM would like to see that the role and production capabilities of KLMuk, which are currently limited by the agreement on code-share production, be expanded. In order to realise the structure that KLM has in mind, a number of changes are necessary which would need to be negotiated with the VNV. The aircraft types which KLMuk fly would have to be included in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, a solution would have to be found for the KLMuk pilots, and the codeshare agreement would have to be adjusted to reflect the new situation. The board of directors (of the VNV) has informed KLM that they should be able to live with the change in structure (of regional operations). It means, after all, an expansion of employment. The consequences for our employment conditions would, however, need to be arranged satisfactorily. The introduction of the F100 can only occur, in the opinion of the board of directors (of the VNV), in a combined KLM-KLC protocol for career advancement and salary structure, and that the solution decided for the KLMuk pilots must in no way cause adjustments to the KLM senority list. Although KLM has in the past blocked attempts to combine the KLM and KLC career advancement protocol and salary structure rules, they are now prepared to discuss this with the VNV on this basis.
Although the KLC pilots were added to the KLM senority list in 1997, it is still not possible for KLM cruise relief pilots, some of whom have been out of school for five years and still not flown, to bid onto the KLC aircraft. The reference above to the combination of the KLM and KLC career advancement protocols which KLM is now ready to discuss addresses this inequity.
A seemingly small yet very important point is “that the solution decided for the KLMuk pilots must in no way cause adjustments to the KLM senority list.” It does not say KLM-KLC senority list, as you have indicated. What they mean is that as far as the KLM aircraft are concerned, B737 and above, it would only be acceptable to the VNV for any KLMuk pilots who would become eligible to fly those aircraft due to a merger, would do so after all the KLM and KLC pilots who are already in line. This is only fair. Being added to the bottom of the KLM list would only be an improvement to a KLMuk pilot’s career prospects, as some of the younger ones could, eventually, become 747 captains. Obviously everyone is going to be able to keep their current position and salary, and I’m sure that the negotiators will strive to make sure that the first officers time-to-command on the regional aircraft remains in line with what it currently is. KLC will insist on it anyway in order to keep training costs down. The biggest disadvantage for KLMuk pilots, as I see it, is that KLC will probably eventually want to base everyone in Amsterdam. I’m also sure, however, that you will be given the option of working for an independent Buzz, if you would prefer, which is going to become a very large airline on it’s own, because of KLM’s money and at the expense of further expansion of the “blue” network.
I would ask you to please refrain from overreacting to gossip and speculation and wait to hear what has been offered to you before denouncing the VNV. The VNV represents not only KLM pilots but also KLC pilots, including any new ones coming in from KLMuk. Also keep in mind that the VNV will in all likelihood hold more negotiations with BALPA sometime in the future, and at that time from a point of disadvantage. Senority mergers are never easy, but I’m sure that we can come to an agreement that will be equally unacceptable for all those concerned.

Dutchie

19th Apr 2002, 20:21

Sometimes I cannot believe how an educated person can come up with a statement as made by Long Haul... I think this kind of nonsense is exactly the reason why I hate the VNV..
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

quote:
What they mean is that as far as the KLM aircraft are concerned, B737 and above, it would only be acceptable to the VNV for any KLMuk pilots who would become eligible to fly those aircraft due to a merger, would do so after all the KLM and KLC pilots who are already in line. This is only fair. Being added to the bottom of the KLM list would only be an improvement to a KLMuk pilot’s career prospects, as some of the younger ones could, eventually, become 747 captains.

If I understand it correctly a KL UK 73 driver only become a mainline 73 driver if, but only if all mainline and KL guys have moved in front of them. We are talking about guys (and gals) who have been at the company for decades... Shame on you Long Haul.

The final insult is that yes if you join now you could become one of the few lucky ones in 30 years time... to fly the 74..

Otterman

19th Apr 2002, 20:22

Buzzboy, looks like we’ll shortly start to repeat ourselves on a topic that we hashed over a month back. That time the subject title was: “If I was the boss of KLM …..”. I am fairly senior at KLM having over 2/3 of the pilots below me. But I watch the developments with great interest. I understand your point of view. But if you read the whole thread I tried to give a bit of background on the tough position that the VNV finds itself, no need to feel sorry. Our seniority list was opened back about six years ago to accommodate our colleagues at KLC (although a large group was unhappy at KLC as well), first and only time in 83 years. This will not happen again for the simple reason that the VNV will disintegrate, it knows this. I think in the previous topic “If I was…” we did come up with a solution that would get my support but taking your seniority to KLM is a nonstarter; you wouldn’t let me take your seat I am sure. An integrated list for KLMuk/KLC is more then possible, and bottom of the list for KLM/C mainline list. The Fokker 100 will need an adjustment because even KLM has a scope clause with the VNV (a very liberal 100 seat design limit). But I can see this becoming a bargaining chip (freezing the fleet, maybe) if an arrangement can be made on other outstanding issues. As far as KLMuk and Buzz something along the lines of BA and GO might happen, where you make the crew dedicated and belonging to a different list. But you know much better then me how that worked. Hope we can come to an accommodation but I very much doubt it. Seniority is the topic from HELL.

buzz boy

19th Apr 2002, 20:49

Longhaul:
A seemingly small yet very important point is “that the solution decided for the KLMuk pilots must in no way cause adjustments to the KLM senority list.” It does not say KLM-KLC senority list, as you have indicated. What they mean is that as far as the KLM aircraft are concerned, B737 and above, it would only be acceptable to the VNV for any KLMuk pilots who would become eligible to fly those aircraft due to a merger, would do so after all the KLM and KLC pilots who are already in line. This is only fair.

you know as well as I that KLM/KLC has a SINGLE seniority list, so you are telling me that our most senior captain with over 30 years service will be junior to your most junior KLC f/o and that this is fair?????? GET REAL!!

That means that our F/Os will many years service will have to wait until all current KLC f/os have had their commands, well we will fight this to the last!!

Just remember, you are setting rules for the future here and if BA comes along and takes over KLM i hope you are put to the bottom of their list!! behind 6000 odd other pilots, because you said it! "this is only fair"

Imhotep

19th Apr 2002, 21:07

Sorry Otterman I dont believe there can be an easy integration of the klmUK and KLC seniority list. With the rights of transfer to mainline the most senior guy at KLC must only have 8 - 10 years in. At klmUK there are F/O's more senior than that. The top guy at klmUK has over 30 years in.
The VNV seem more interested in finding something for their cruise pilots to fly, sorry land. All I can say is those guys knew the score when they joined KLM.

Looks like we crossed Buzzboy

buzz boy

19th Apr 2002, 21:35

Sorry i forgot to add Longhaul;

the VNV does NOT represent the KLMuk pilots who will be joining KLM as you will not even allow us to join the union at present, that says it all i think.

RAFAT

20th Apr 2002, 02:21

Ahhhhhh... Air UK, things were happier then.

Baron Harkonnen

20th Apr 2002, 06:36

Sorry to read all this guys. It has remarkable overtones of the attitude of BA and mainline BALPA to us in BACE. For a comparison of patronising attitudes and short sighted attempts at self protection, compare our thread about BA, EOG and the RJ100. When Rod merges with KLM, this is going to cause an interesting little scenario - I think Danny will need a new server again, and the employment lawyers will make a fortune.
Management must really be laughing in the HR department.

Good luck to KLMuk anyway, don't rely onBA or BALPA when the time comes.

ooizcalling

20th Apr 2002, 09:19

A few corrections from 'long hauls' fantasies.

Fantasy : "No one has tried to screw you and in my opinion no one will"
Fact : Most KLC careers are severly limited by VNV (read KLM) imposed restrictions eg. The Fokker 100 went to junior KLM pilots for initial commands. KLC limited to F28 and later F70.
Fantasy : "Although the KLC pilots were added to the KLM senority list in 1997"
Fact : 'Long Haul' just forgot to mention the small point that a significant number of them would lose half there seniority in the move !
Fantasy : "it is still not possible for KLM cruise relief pilots, some of whom have been out of school for five years and still not flown, to bid onto the KLC aircraft"
Fact : The VNV (read KLM) would not consider Fokker 50 in this negotiation.... Only Jet aircraft for KLMers, nothing lower than that ! In doing so they eliminated one of the best learning cycles of their lives. (My opinion ; The first few years "out of school" should be on this type of operation! = maturity & experience)

And so it goes !

Keep these things in mind buzz boy and good luck !

Long Haul

20th Apr 2002, 09:43

buzz boy,

you know as well as I that KLM/KLC has a SINGLE seniority list, so you are telling me that our most senior captain with over 30 years service will be junior to your most junior KLC f/o and that this is fair?????? GET REAL!! That means that our F/Os will many years service will have to wait until all current KLC f/os have had their commands, well we will fight this to the last!!

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Your most senior captain with over 30 years service should be given the option to fly for Buzz or for KLC. Should he or she choose KLC, they should be a F100 captain, which is the largest type that KLC will operate.
A current KLMuk F50 F/O with 3 years service who chooses KLC should upgrade to captain F50, or F/O F100, or captain F100 at about the same time as a current KLC pilot also with 3 years service. I am thus in favor of date-of-hire integration of KLMuk pilots - onto the KLC fleet.
What I would find unacceptable is if your most senior captain with 30 years of service all of a sudden next month became a B747 captain before a KLM mainline pilot with 29 years service. After all, KLMuk is not bringing any widebody aircraft to the merger. KLMuk is and has been a regional airline, so any possibility at all of progressing above the level of regional aircraft is a bonus.

buzz boy

20th Apr 2002, 10:24

Longhaul;

then thats fine, KLM keep ther A/C and cruise pilots and KLC/KLMuk keep their fleets and THEIR OWN Seniority, you cant have your cake and eat it my friend, if you want transfer rights back down for your cruise pilots then equal date of joining seniority for all, otherwise HANDS OFF!

Also KLM are removing the KLMuk blue pilots from Buzz with NO transfer rights back, so the Buzz option does not exist for those guys who fly the F100 or the F50.

Also in 1997 7 of our 737s were transfered to KLM with no rights for the AirUK guys to continue flying them, something to do with the scope clause, as a result over time our pilot force has been reduced from 450 to 350, 100 lost jobs!! but more jobs for KLM, after sept 11th we lost 3 more a/c with rusultant pilot job losses, enough is enough!!

BigRab

20th Apr 2002, 10:31

As an outsider the fairest way to integrate a seniority list is by original date of joining.
Some from each grouping will win, some will loose.
Whilst we are on the subject of seniority lists, personally I think that their existance is a pilots own goal, as they restrict freedom of movement and hence employers incentive to improve terms and conditions to attract the best.
Lets face it once you are a reasonably senior Captain, there is very little incentive to move if you have to start again at the bottom. Is this not the real reason for the argument above?

Long Haul

20th Apr 2002, 11:54

BigRab,
I would agree with you that date-of-hire is the best way to merge senority lists, but only with respect to companies which are approxiamately the same size. An important reason for the existence of senority lists in aviation is for safety's sake. Without senority an airline would, due to financial considerations, quickly become motivated to advance the careers of those pilots who carried the least amount of fuel, who tried to carry on to the destination at all cost, and who didn't mind operating aircraft which were questionably airworthy. Don't get me wrong, most airlines have scruples; it's just that the senority system greatly relieves airline captains of commercial considerations and allows them to concentrate on their main objective, safety.

buzz boy,

I would vote against any deal in which KLMuk pilots were not given the right to choose with which company to continue their careers. Since the negotiations have not yet begun, it is too early for you to say that that will not happen. One of the options open to the negotiators is exactly what you suggest; keeping a separate senority list for the ex-KLMuk pilots and ex-KLMuk airplanes. But in that case your copilots will not get the opportunity to fill vacancies on the current KLC aircraft as they become available when pilots leave to join KLM mainline. Nor will they ever get to join KLM mainline themselves. Do you really speak for all your colleagues (especially the younger ones) when you say that you don't want that?

Dutchie

23rd Apr 2002, 08:48

Long Haul are you real or just a wind up

Without senority an airline would, due to financial considerations, quickly become motivated to advance the careers of those pilots who carried the least amount of fuel, who tried to carry on to the destination at all cost, and who didn't mind operating aircraft which were questionably airworthy. Don't get me wrong, most airlines have scruples; it's just that the senority system greatly relieves airline captains of commercial considerations and allows them to concentrate on their main objective, safety.

Absolutely nonsense, basically you are saying your dear collegues in other airlines are unsafe bastards who fight to keep on flying in unsafe aircraft... Yes there is the risk that such would happen in a small mom and pap operation. But in larger airlines there are plenty of opt outs like wispering something to the local CAA. And if they are not up to it (MAS for instance a beautiful KL partner who arrived a few times on fumes at LHR) you can still us the CAA in other countries or the press. The funny thing is that it cost more to the airline if it becomes public knowledge that they operate unsafe than stimulating pilots to go on and 99% of airline managemnet knows this.

You have just played the VNV joker, everytime you guys don't get your way you always go out to the press and come with a statement like: we do not understand why xxx is not agreeing with us because this a safety issue... John Doe reading the newspaper and still full of awe for everything flying will pick it up and worse off all believe you. Losing another would be passenger and hurting the industry because of your childish behaviour..:mad:

We are however very pleased that somebody labouring for 30 years at KL UK will get the right to quote: ..choose.. where to work , but hey sorry you will lose the right to your seniority on the way.. and mainline is off limits.. because your company did not bring any widebodies... Has the idea crossed your mind that KL UK is your company too... :eek:

Otterman

23rd Apr 2002, 11:38

Dutchie, I thought what Long Haul wrote was on the mark. Don’t know what industry you have been working in the last few years, but seniority is all we have. KLMuk isn’t the same company from an employee perspective (everything related to our work is different, but only the owner is the same), that is what the discussion is about right now. There was an existing integration model for KLM mainline and KLC pilots before the merger of the seniority lists. This was modified in some crucial details and was sold to the KLM mainline pilots as acting in the spirit of the original integration model. Left the junior KLM pilots pissed off and a good chunk of the KLC pilots as well. KLM and KLMuk have nothing at the moment that allows pilots from KLMuk to transfer over. I don’t know of any major western airline that does not operate under the seniority system. So I don’t know whom you are referring to when you accuse long haul of making all sorts of accusations about other airlines being unsafe. In the States and Canada there are no models for integrating feeder/regional airline pilots (even the ones which are owned) into the mainline list. They might get hiring preference but certainly join at the bottom of the list. Enlighten me if I am wrong. There is no upsides for us KLM mainline pilots in a pilot merger with KLMuk. Wasn’t with KLC either, but the VNV decided in its wisdom that they didn’t want KLM to be able to use the divide and conquer tactic in the future between the two pilot groups. All my valued colleagues at all the airlines that KLM owns a share in can keep what you have, but any transfer to mainline aircraft will happen from the bottom of the list. Our issue with second officers is something that will take care of itself in the next few years.
Start out by creating a list for the regional partners recognizing their full seniority, and then add the regional pilots who are not already on the mainline list to the bottom in order of seniority. You lose nothing and gain the potential of moving up in the future, for whatever that is worth to a senior pilot. Otherwise, if you want to fly for a major apply at one. But hell will freeze over before regional crews take away anything from present day KLM mainline pilots on the seniority front. Hope I was clear enough.

seat 0A

23rd Apr 2002, 12:09

Wholehartedly agree, Otterman.
And as to the argument stated before, that we should be grateful that the UK pilots are kind enough to bring all the pax to fill the KLM longhaul fleet: You don`t think the fact these pax want to fly longhaul from AMS has anything to do with your full aircraft, do you? Without KLM longhaul attracting all those pax from regional Britain, your little operation wouldn`t be doing all that great, now would it? Works both ways, as always.

Dutchie

23rd Apr 2002, 12:22

It is the above mentioned arrogance that "without us they have no existance" rather the fact that the guy (or gal) has been working for the company for years. Probably working more crappy hours that the average log haul queen that upsets me.

Lets face it both the companies have one goal: move the SLF.. the toys are differant but the work is the same!

Ref the remark that the operation would look differant without feedering AMS: IT DID! Get your facts right. The Air UK operation at the time was a much better operation (a lot of fun intra UK flying as well!) and more fun to work at with more aircraft!

Wet Power

23rd Apr 2002, 16:58

Worst thing that could have happened was being taken over by KLM - a good airline decimated.

Wonder if they have spent the money from the AIR UK Heathrow slots yet or stopped laughing at the swap of six very unwanted KLM F100s for seven Air UK Ltd B737-400s a few years ago (they were only lent to Air UK Leisure before the A320s came along).

KLM longhaul would be nowhere if it wasn't for the Brits and Germans feeding in.

How do you turn a profitable airline into an unprofitable one?
Get a national airline to buy it.

Otterman

24th Apr 2002, 09:04

I am sure Air UK was a better, friendlier place to work all those years ago. But please name me an airline that hasn’t become more commercially minded and where it has become “more fun” to work at, over this past decade. Survival is what it is all about. WE all work more hours in crappier conditions then in the good old days (whenever those were). Would haves, could haves, and should haves don’t achieve a hell of a lot. We have to deal with the situation we find ourselves in. I hope you aren’t living in the illusion that if Air UK had remained independent things would still be the same as they were all those years ago. There isn’t one airline where they are. KLM mainline has been stagnant now for more then four years, partly because of the liberal scope clause and interchange that has been allowed by the VNV. Even the recent aircraft order still leaves it barely breaking even on fleet numbers, just a straight replacement. This makes any seniority discussion that much more impossible. Looks like part of the KLMuk business (BUZZ) is set for expansion maybe that will help you guys. But these walks down memory lane aren’t moving the cause forward.

wickerman

24th Apr 2002, 09:58

Not directly involved with KLM etc but I'm intriuged by the insinuation that a cosy seniority culture leads to a safer Flight Environment.
Do you have any evidence of that? I seem to recall some very high profile accidents involving very senior aircrew over the years.
As a justification for a "closed shop" agreement it seems very thin.

Belgian Beauty

24th Apr 2002, 10:52

I am wrong Dutchie but it appears from your profile you are not yet even a qualified pilot?

Dutchie

24th Apr 2002, 11:22

Just from the telex:

UNILEVAR LOOKING AT COMBINING FACTORIES, LABOR PROBLEMS AHEAD. (by our AMS office)

The Anglo Dutch multinational Unilevar is considering merging it's Baked Bean factories in the UK and the Netherlands. Although it makes a lot of business sense there is some unease from the staff reference merging on basis of date of joining. We visited the offices of the Union to find out more.

Mr N.O. Clue from the Vhink Never Vurther Union stated that it would make no sense to merge on the basis of date of joining as in the Dutch factory they are making cans holding 350 Beans and in the UK only 100 Beans per can. Although the crew operating the machines are trained to the same standard, have the same licences just on a different size machine is something not worth considering he claims:"Lets face it if we did not make these nice large cans there would be no demand for small cans. "

The fact the customer needs small cans before using large cans was lost on him. "The staff working in the UK factories should be gratefull that they have the change to work on the large can production line in 30 years time is an example of our positive feeling to our UK counterparts."

Upon mentioning by the reporter that this might be a little unfair on the guy (or Gal) who worked hard (if noit harder) for years Mr N.O. Clue responded "but it is the only thing we have."

After a few embarising minutes because even he started to realise it was a pathetic reason to hide his selfisness he came up with the right reason why seniority was a good system in the first place: SAFETY! "Please understand that if there was no seniority system people would be promoted on their merits rather than on the years they have been working for the company" He refered to all the industries where there was a system based on quality of the person and said that it was quite clear that the system was not working. "look around: banks, insurance industry, governement, IT, the building trade, shipping, retail it is a great mess in which people are only promoted because of who they know rather than by year of joining! If we had not a seniority system people would start putting all kind of things in our cans, management would push us to produce more cans per hour, ask us for overtime and other very unsafe practices as seen in all the above mentioned industries. As it is well known that the only thing the Bean Counters in HQ want is for us to break all the EU directives, National Baked Bean Directives, general HS rules, etc. This is not just any other industry: Management is evil!!

So when asked that thus there is an excellent reason to include it's UK counterparts within the excellent safe baked bean seniority system he showed that he was well read by quoting:" All staff are equal within this international company but some are more equal then others! "

Dutchie

24th Apr 2002, 11:25

Hi BB,

Too busy on writing stories rather than updating my profile I guess :D

When I started on the board there where not so many stories to fill in your profile I guess. Still waiting to fill in my blood type and social security number though.:rolleyes: ATPL said it all in my days... :o

Looking at yours: what are you?

Belgian Beauty

24th Apr 2002, 12:25

Not a sad person with no life by the looks of it. And perhaps you should update your profile then.:D

Otterman

24th Apr 2002, 15:19

The seniority system is by no means perfect. But through the many discussion on this subject on sites like Pprune I have not even come close to reading about a better alternative. I also share the view that by keeping a competitive element out of our working environment, safety is enhanced. Look at the safety statistics for major western carriers, they are far superior then other regions and all are seniority based. We all know our fair share of brown nosers who have made it into management jobs, just by doing what they do. If you would reward that sort of behaviour by early or quick advancement in our cockpits, you would do great harm to a harmonious working environment, as far as it goes. Long haul also mentioned some of the pitfalls of towing the company line too much in order to guarantee favourable assessments and advancements. He is right in my opinion. The other system of advancing on “merit” or previous employment (ex-Air Force eg.) has made for some really interesting accidents out in the Far East, in recent memory. Dutchie, your bean story implies that you are a clueless on this subject. Just a junior guy looking for a way up I guess. That is your right, but in these discussions keeping on the subject rather then offering a useless narrative would be more helpful. There is no better system then the one we have right now.

Herod

24th Apr 2002, 19:19

Just a thought: when "the management" realise there is a market for low-cost longhaul (remember Laker's Skytrain?) and buzz is operating a stack of 767s, who will be crewing them?

buzz boy

24th Apr 2002, 22:24

Boy oh boy, well KLM mainline pilots, you have proved that that has been said for a while, you are ARROGANT and totally selfish.

Most of the KLMuk pilots have NO interest WHATSOEVER in flying your mainline aircraft, those that wanted to fly longhaul have or will leave to join far better airlines in the UK.

It might be well for you to consider EU law and the fact that your current "regional partner" ie KLC has full seniority within KLM ML.

BY creating a single seniority list when you integratated the KLC pilots some time ago onto the mainline list you set the rules, therefore any merger of KLC and KLMuk with the pilots from the UK being put at the bottom of the combined list would SEVERELY disadvantage the KLMuk pilots therefore be ILLEGAL.

The only solution is to create a seperate list for your "regional division" by combining KLC and KLMuk pilots by joining date, but i am sure the KLC pilots wouldnt accept being removed from the main list.

KLMuk represent less that 10% of the total KLM workforce so any disadvantage to KLM or KLC mainline pilots would be minimal anyway.

Otterman

25th Apr 2002, 09:20

I am surprised at the rhetoric on this subject. It shows a lack of understanding about the way the world works. The assertions about what is fair and how things should be, and even feigning knowledge about EU law shows this. There is no major carrier that has even comes close to allowing regional carriers to integrate with any seniority into their mainline list. Ask the pilots at the Air Canada Regional carriers. Their claim to seniority was a lot stronger than the situation we are talking about right now. They ended up with zero seniority and no right to transfer, even bottom of the list. We are talking about some carriers that have been owned by Air Canada since the early nineties. We are also talking about companies based in the same country. Now our British colleagues want the full force of EU law to help them out? This while Britain keeps all sorts of opt out clauses on every EU subject that comes along, and not participating in the Euro? Bring it on; I am confident that it is a no brainer. Ask the KLC pilots who decided to go to the judge. Zip nada. Ask the pilots at Republic Airlines, and their takeover by Northwest Orient back in 1986 what is fair. Ask the TWA pilots (bought out by American), or Canadian Airlines International (merged into Air Canada). For that matter ask about what is fair on our side of the ocean. DanAir anyone? Do you have an example for me to support your case, do Lufthansa Cityline pilots or the former Eurowings pilots get Lufthansa seniority? It might be arrogant to stand up and protect your career, so be it. I can live with that. Allowing regionals into our list with seniority would show us to be stupid idiots. If the common list is to be, they know where they can join. Even that is more liberal then the cases that I have mentioned above. NOBODY looses anything and the young ones might gain.

Otterman

25th Apr 2002, 09:32

As far as KLC pilots getting full seniority that is in no way the case. Why would some of them be upset then? When a pilot joined KLC it was part of his contract that he could be tested for transfer to KLM mainline after four years of service with KLC. If he passed his grading he would get a position on the KLM mainline list at the bottom of the list. He would continue his employment at KLC for another four years after which time he was allowed to bid onto KLM mainline equipment. So it meant that after eight years at KLC service he had built up four years of seniority at KLM. The union through strong lobbying efforts by KLC pilots amended this deal in some small but significant ways when they decided that a merged list was desirable. The result was that the list was opened up and around 250 KLM mainline pilots (out of around 1500 back then) lost places in varying degrees. That was the integration model, but in no way did KLC pilots get full seniority, at most some got half, others nothing. But this was part of the contract upon hiring, we have nothing in place for KLMuk pilots. So what law or contract could the VNV possibly break?

buzz boy

25th Apr 2002, 11:08

otterman.

The fact is that now there is a fully integrated single seniority list, if KLMuk pilots were put at the bottom of this list it would mean the our most senior captain (30 odd years service) would be junior to the most junior KLC first officer (months of service). That would also mean that or First officers would have to wait until EVERY dutch pilot has fill at a F100 command some have up to 8 years service. This is agains EU law as it is serverly dis-advantaging one group against another.

There is a model for regional integration into mainline list, that airline is KLM !!!!!!!!!!!! and by doing this you have to live with the concequences. So get real longhaul and Otterman, we will NOT be s**t on, we have rights and will exercise those rights.

buzz boy

25th Apr 2002, 11:18

Oh by the way otterman.

British airways / british Caledonian, full seniority merger. The Dan air pilots WON the court case and that has set the president in law, Brymon airways/ British regional airways, BA regional partners have been merged to one list, date of joining, there is still a disscusion going on as to if they will get mainline rights. Air2000 / leisure international, full merger of seniority by date of joining, etc etc etc.

Otterman

25th Apr 2002, 12:02

I recognize that this is a very emotional subject to us all, but I am trying to give some factual background about the subject as well. There was a transfer model for KLC pilots, there isn’t with KLMuk.

In the previous topic about this subject “if I was the boss at KLM….” There were some solutions offered which would do justice to the 30-year senior man at KLMuk. The regional KLMuk and KLC pilot group could be integrated strictly on years of service, or honour years of service in relation to the number of aircraft each brings into the deal (just like your examples of recent mergers). This is what happened at the Air Canada Regional carriers (recently renamed Air Canada Jazz). Once this list is established all the KLMuk pilots would join bottom of the list for KLM mainline (did not happen at BA regional or any other regional I know). That would mean that yes, for KLM mainline equipment the 30 year man/woman at KLMuk would be junior on the KLM list to the three month KLC pilot. But his seniority would be fully honoured on his present equipment (like the merger of BA regional). By the way the merged Air Canada regional list brings with it no Air Canada seniority, and they are not on the mainline list.

The Fokker 100 is a more delicate subject still because KLM and the VNV have a scope clause that limits KLC to a 100 seat aircraft design limit (so no screwing in 100 seats into a Boeing 737-500 eg.) This is already one of the most liberal scope clauses in the business, no limit on the smaller equipment. In the States 50 seats is more common for jets and 70 seats for turbo-props with numbers locked in. There have been cases in the past again at Air Canada (another was Air Wisconsin I believe), where the bigger machines (BAE 146) were grand fathered to the regional, but the numbers were frozen, they were flying the equipment on those routes before code-share/ownership was in place. Since the leases for the BAE 146 at Air Canada regional are up they are being phased out, and the scope clause is in effect fully. That could be one solution. But there are others.

EU law does not come into this equation in any way shape or form. The appeals court in the Netherlands has already ruled that KLM mainline, and KLC are not the same company from a pilots point of view, and in Holland we do take EU law more then seriously. Whatever the deal will be there will be pissed off people. They will test the deal in the courts, but the chance of success is slim to none based on previous cases.

About your previous merger examples you are talking apples and oranges. I believe it was long haul that mentioned that companies of similar size and market have and can be merged date of hire, but that is just not the case for KLMuk and KLM. All your previous cases are companies doing the same work, regionals or majors. BA and Caledonian was a done deal because the BA pilots gained more then the Caledonian pilots. There were many more senior guys in BA then at Caledonian. Just ask the Caledonian 747 Captain who lost his seat when they phased out the CF-6 powered Classic. He did not have the seniority to hold the left seat at the merged BA. He kept his pay, but lost the seat. It would be similar to a merger between KLM and Martinair, wouldn’t find too many KLM pilots who would have a problem with that one (lots of wide-bodies and a lot more growth in the last seven years then at KLM), but that is not the way it works. From what I read the Dan air victory was hollow at best. As for mainline rights at BA for the regionals, don’t hold your breath, the talks are not exactly moving at any kind of speed. BALPA knows which side its bread is buttered on. Sorry for the length.

buzz boy

25th Apr 2002, 12:24

otterman.

Cityflyer express were merged with BA european operations Gatwick with full seniority honored, they were then placed on the mainline list at the bottom.

I believe this kind of deal is sound, however KLM does not have a seperate regional list, would the KLC pilots accept being merged into the KLMuk blue line list?

As for the F100, this is type common with the F70 and makes sense for the crews to operate both for economic reasons, we have two types one is 101 seats two galley, the other is 103 seats single galley, surely you are not going to argue over 3 seats?? Its this kind of restriction and scope clause that have kept the costs of flag carriers so high, we need to be competitive if KLM is to survive.

Otterman

25th Apr 2002, 14:17

What you state in your previous post would probably be acceptable to the majority of the pilots. KLC pilots might gripe about it because KLMuk pilot group has been around longer, but they have a higher KLM mainline position and most will leave the merged KLC/KLMuk eventually. The problem will sort itself out in the future. The principle of nobody taking away anyone’s seat should be paramount. So a senior KLMuk pilot who could technically hold a left seat on an Amsterdam based Fokker 70 would have to wait to bid onto it until a seat opens up. You can’t supplant somebody who already flies the left seat, or right seat for that matter, same of course for KLC pilots who want a seat on an aircraft in Britain. These are all details. You could also block any transfers for a period of say five years, again many KLC pilots will have left by then. As far as the configuration of the Fokker 100’s it is not academic. The scope is the design limit. For the Fokker 100 that is 107 seats. A solution can be found for this, but the problem is there. You don’t make agreements and then cave into the company over academics of it is only a three-seat difference. The company will always look at pushing the limit on any agreement, and in order to get approval a deal on the issues will have to be struck.

As far as the cost of scope. I think we could quickly agree that the idea is to take enumeration up not downmarket. At KLM benchmark studies are done on a continual basis to keep our costs in line with other competitors. We are meeting that target easily. Last benchmark put us just below average in costs among relevant Europe carriers. Let us worry about what is competitive in this industry. Sure we can get people to fly the KLM mainline airplanes for a fraction of what we get paid, we were all in that position once; where we would have done almost anything for a job.

Scope is an industry phenomenon, so in broad strokes it affects all airlines in a similar way. KLM survival is not linked to scope. And the cost structure is something between the union and the company.

Lastly for now, we are talking about the first international pilot merger that I know about. That means groundbreaking work. Which could set the precedent for mergers to come. All my examples and yours are same country mergers, so there isn’t any jury prudence out there on this issue.

BluffOldSeaDog

25th Apr 2002, 14:43

BozBoy - Don't think you've got it all right there sport. BRAL/Brymon/BAR combined seniority list is still in the air, nothing sorted out there yet. Anyhow "BA Regional Partners" if you mean BAR doesn't have any pilots of its own

Imhotep

25th Apr 2002, 18:46

Interesting developments in this thread whilst I've been sunning myself in Hoofdorp.
Firstly I stand with seniority being the least worst system, not perfect but nobody has come up with a fairer system.
Secondly, although I can't speak for the pilots at klmUK, I believe a majority are not interested in a klm mainline career. Not many want to be based in AMS. For most it is a lifestyle issue, we already have longhaul airlines in UK, if thats the kind of flying we wanted thats where most would go. I know many former colleagus flying for BA, Virgin or charter outfits. I may be wrong but I dont know any UK national klmUK pilot who has even applied to klc or klm. Therefore I can see no problem with the klmUK pilots going on the bottom of the mainline list or not on the list at all. You can keep it.
Thirdly, what we are interested in is the same thing that mainline and klc pilots are, protecting what we already have. We wont stand idly by and watch our aircraft and positions handed out to mainline pilots due to the number of seats in them. The aircraft already have crews and a career structure that generally means 8 - 9 years to jet command. If some guy still in the RHS with mainline after 15 years is rubbing his hands thinking he is going to get an F100 and some cruise pilot with 5 years in thinks he might get F100 RHS because of their mainline seniority they can forget it. They knew the system when they joined and shouldnt take positions at our expense. If they want they can go on the bottom of our seniority list and wait like everybody else has. When it comes around they we be assessed for suitability (sorry couldnt resist that one).
The company is pushing us together, I believe most klmUK pilots could live with a combination with klc as, I believe, we would gain more, but the klc pilots might have something to say about that. What is needed is a solution to keep us out of mainline and mainline out of us.
That's it and I haven't even mentioned our pension and retaining our wish to free transfer between blue and buzz.

ooizcalling

25th Apr 2002, 19:32

Sunning yourself in Hoofddorp ???? Dam It ! Missed Summer again !!!

Seniority may be the 'least worst system' but it is 'a system' and NOT 'a religion', and any thought of addressing it's shortcommings should not be treated as heresy!

captain codpiece

26th Apr 2002, 06:33

Buzz Boy Just a quick comparison for you.A very similar thing has recently happened with CFE and BA.All CFE pilots (some who have been in for all of CFE existence) where placed at the bottom of the BA master seniority list.BALPA, of course,where representing both sides.To get an idea of the full impact of this you should monitor the move of the RJ's to MAN & BHX without the pilots.The pilots will move to other BA mainline fleets where their seat position will be determined by seniority (which is zilch!).This is probably not very comforting for you.Something I would point out is that the union use the career opportunity arguement i.e."you might get to fly a 747" if your a good boy, which makes most people think they don't understand the career advancement issue.However,merged seniority lists don't seem to happen nowadays probably because in the BUZZ/KLM case one pilot workforce is far larger than the other and carries much greater force.No-one is willing to let their career stall in any way for what is very justifiable but would affect them directly and it would seen very much by the mainline crew'sthat you are actually joining their company.Good luck.

buzz boy

26th Apr 2002, 10:43

Captain Codpiece;

Were the Cityflyer pilots not merged into the BA EOG seniority list at gatwick on a year on year basis? then placed on the bottom of the main line list? If so what is going to be replacing the RJ100s? wont you get a type change at base agreement?

Hope it all works out for you, i think BALPA are actually working quite hard on our behalf, as INHOTEP said earlier we are not interested in KLMs precious mainline aircraft, we basicly want to protect what we have, as we know that KLM mainline have their greedy eyes on the F100 but want to give nothing in return.

As said earlier if we want to fly longhaul most would go to BA or Virgin, in my experience the KLM people are a nightmare to work with, very blinkered and inflexable, as famously said "its shnot posssible sir"!!!

Otterman

26th Apr 2002, 16:22

As a foreigner in Holland I think I can be a bit more objective on the subject of how it is to work with KLM and its people. I have been doing it for close to fifteen years now. You lack this knowledge and it is becoming clear you don’t really have a clue what you are talking about in regards to this seniority issue either. Sure KLM has its way of doing things. No better or worse then other airlines. Sure it is burdened by an 83-year history. Management is the same throughout our industry, won’t find many fans of them among us. But in a cockpit setting I have nothing but praise for the way KLM works. We have a very flat authority gradient. A good CRM practice, and good training. I have found throughout my career that the people have been generous and appreciative of my input in the cockpit. Co-pilots are fully integrated into the operation doing everything the Captain does from starting engines to taxiing and take-off and landing. Not many airlines can claim this. My young colleagues straight out of the training academy have proven themselves to me many times over. Sure there are shysters about at KLM, but name me a company where that isn’t the case, KLMuk?

KLM management has decided that it needs to consolidate its operations, it is their right, they own them. If and when KLMuk and KLC are merged it changes things from the present situation. The Fokker 100 is a problem. KLC is scoped to 100 seats. KLM mainline isn’t eying the Fokker 100’s; they are a breach to the scope that we have in place. It will have to be dealt with. And that doesn't automatically mean that you lose them, lets see what happens.

The reason that no KLMuk pilot (that I know of) has transferred to KLM also has something to do with the language barrier. Living in England and commuting on KLM or KLMuk is something that a number of my colleagues do, maybe you have even met them. So that shouldn’t be the show stopper. But KLM likes (used to be a requirement) its pilots to be able to speak Dutch; most Brits I know don’t speak another language but their own. KLC didn’t have this requirement. With a merged list this would be a gain for KLMuk pilots who are interested in the lifestyle that KLM mainline brings with it. I am sure for you BA or Virgin are a much better fit since you don’t like the Dutch. I would say go for it.

JW411

26th Apr 2002, 18:54

Otterman:

"Co-pilots are fully integrated into the operation doing everything the Captain does from starting engines to taxiing and take-off and landing. Not many airlines can claim this".

What a load of bo**ocks! I have never in my long flying career worked for an organisation that didn't have a "leg and leg about" policy. Only in very exceptional circumstances would I ever take a F/O's leg. Even then, I would make sure that he got one of mine in compensation.

Otherwise, how the hell do you expect them to learn? Would it not be awful to be incapacitated in the left seat when the F/O is having to do it for the first time? That would be guaranteed to finish you off!

I apologise for being a bit off topic but I could not let Otterman get away with trying to make us think that KLM are particularly enlightened. (If I were in KLMUk I think I would rather find another job rather than try to join this archaic mess). Can you just imagine the erruptions if Ozboy really tries to merge BA with KLM? Certainly, Danny would need another server!

buzz boy

26th Apr 2002, 19:15

Yawn!!

At KLMuk we have the same policy of leg and leg about, on his leg f/o starts engines, taxi, same limits as a captain for x winds approach limits etc. In fact it is in the ops manual that f/os are trained to the same standard of captains.

so there!!

Its like going back to the seventies at SPL with KLM, 10 men to do one persons job on the ground, people always late for things like airbiridges, its NEVER their fault always someone elses, appauling catering, old fasioned unionised attitudes, as i said before "its just not posssible sir!!"

Otterman

26th Apr 2002, 19:45

JW411, what is it with you folks? It’s like somebody *****d in your cornflakes or something. I apparently wasn’t clear about what I wrote. And you are reading things into my posts which aren’t there. What is the deal with all the animosity against KLM by the way?

When it is the co-pilots leg he does it all. He starts the engines, taxies the aircraft out to the runway, and is hands on throttle during the take-off run. There are no x-wind restriction after one year on type and an additional sim. session. He/She taxies the aircraft onto the gate and shuts her down. This applies for all types except the MD-11 which does not come with a tiller on the right. I have been around long enough to know that alternating legs is industry standard (and I was giving you enough smarts to figure you could read that into it, sorry my mistake), but there are many airlines out there where the co-pilot does not do the engine start-up or taxi the aircraft. Certainly there are more airlines then not in which the first officer does not have his hands on the throttle during the take off run. So chill out man, all I am trying to say is that KLM is a great outfit to work for, where you are a full part of the operation whether you are in the right or left seat. And having people saying things about us that just are plain false should be put right.

If KLMuk has the same policy, good for you. As far as KLM being an archaic mess, what do you base that on? What is your knowledge about KLM, and how do you figure it differs from other majors, where is the utopia? You say you have been around the business for a long time flying for many different organizations. Why is that, couldn’t settle down or you just didn’t fit into a large organization? I can’t understand why standing up for my job, career is arrogant. Nobody is forcing anyone to fly for KLM, if is it such a **** organization go somewhere else.

Our ground organization at Schiphol can of course be improved and it never goes the way we would like it to go. But at what hub or airline do things go smoothly all of the time?

We are way off topic, but I want to tell you guys that I like working for KLM and I have a deep appreciation for my fellow employees in the cockpit and cabin. Nuff said.

buzz boy

26th Apr 2002, 20:41

WOW hit a raw nerve Otterman???

I havent said i have been around the airlines, dont know where u got that from, and my experience is based on 7 years flying in and out of AMS being mis handled by KLM, i cannot and havent commented on your flight deck procedures.

As for not wanting to be part of KLM well you got that right!! we DID NOT choose to be taken over by them, they have wrecked a bloody good airline in AirUK, and now wish to turn our lives upside down again, except this time we do not intend to be S**T on like in the past

Otterman

26th Apr 2002, 20:49

Hey Buzz Boy, that was direct to JW411, is it my english? Hitting a nerve, sure. I have a low Bull**** tolerance. Living in the past is not getting you places. The future is here. Try to find an accomodation with it.

Long Haul

26th Apr 2002, 21:10

I began taking part in this discussion hopeful for a solution which would have been acceptable for both the KLMuk pilots and KLC pilots, however, after having been subject to this kind of abuse I now hope that any KLMuk pilot wishing to stay on at KLC be forced to reapply to Schiphol-Oost to keep their job. All of you out there who think that KLMuk was this great airline ruined by the mean old blue boys are nuts; I worked for a commuter airline for five years and I can tell you that flying for a real airline is better paying, more fun, gives more time off, and is a lot more challenging and rewarding. And the girls are much better looking.

ooizcalling

26th Apr 2002, 21:28

Hey Otterman, your view of KLM .... is that of a pilot recruited directly into KLM or via cityhopper.... There is a world of difference !

The Direct entry KLM pilot should be very pleased with his job, and his career prospects etc etc. The operational differences are not a point of debate, eg I could say that a 'very flat authority gradient' can be just as bad as a steep authority gradient and we could go on about that, but that is not the point of the initial post that started this thread.

Ask a cityhopper pilot what he thinks of his KLM colleagues as represented by the VNV and you'll get a different story. Whilst being 100% KLM pilots (same contract as you), their careers are TOTALLY controlled by limitations imposed by their mainline KLM colleagues, they dont/didn't have a say in it ! Well yes they did, but with about 150 KLM cityhopper pilots verses 1,500 KLM mainline pilots, a vote was a mere technicality that allows the Mainline group to hide behind a facade which they call democracy ! You could have 90% of the mainline group not vote and the proposal would still pass... that's not democracy.

So, Instead of just limiting the cityhopper operation to prevent it encroaching on what you see as mainline operations (which could be seen as a reasonable attitude) you also limited the pilots within cityhopper to stay within that division, and up to recently, never to move on in their career with their company KLM. Instead you mainline KLM pilots keep all the movement for yourselves. Totally unjustifiable !

This sort of treatment is what the KLmuk crews are aware of and not prepared to accept. In that they have my full support.

Did you know that within Holland but from outside KLM the VNV is known as the KLM pilots club, and even within the single aisle KLM divisions it's known as the 'four hundred fliers club'

Many a true word said in jest !

buzz boy

27th Apr 2002, 00:39

Longhaul:

How dare you!!

A: u have NO IDEA about KLMuk and the people who work for it.

B: we have more days off than cityhopper pilots and will not give that up

C: we are paid better than cityhopper pilots and will not take a pay cut

D: come into the crew centre and tell the KLMuk cabin crew that yours are better looking

get a life and keep your bloody airline, if you are the kind of guy that i would have to fly with i would rather work at my local store

T**ser

Long Haul

27th Apr 2002, 06:49

If they are in the crew centre they know, trust me. Besides, I wouldn't want to meet one of them later in a dark alley.

JW411

27th Apr 2002, 07:57

Otterman:

I was merely picking up on your claim that "Not many airlines can claim this". I still maintain that this statement is a load of old bo**ocks.

You also wonder why I have worked for several airlines in the past. Has it ever occurred to you that the list of airlines that are not state-owned or state-protected that have gone bust is endless. In no case that I can remember was the collapse of an independent airline caused by the pilots.

On second thoughts, having been in KLM for so long, it is very unlikely that you have any idea what life is like outside in the real world. I just hope for your sake that your bubble doesn't burst
like it did for lots of folk in SABENA.

Heavy Landing

27th Apr 2002, 08:55

There are a lot of other pilots who work for KLMuk apart from Buzzboy, and we certainly dont all share his dogmatic views :rolleyes: (notice the absence of any other significant posts from KLMuk pilots on this thread)

Most of us are keeping an open mind until we have something tangible to work with. Buzzboy and his like are part of a very vocal minority faction in the company who have decreed that 'there is nothing, and there can never be anything, for us in this proposed merger'...........even before the terms of the merger are known!!! :eek:

The majority of pilots at KLMuk know that the merge CAN be successful, but that depends on how fair the deal that is finally thrashed out is to KLM, KLC and KLMuk pilots. The sooner KLM, VNV and BALPA come clean about their intentions, the sooner we can have meaningful discussions. Rumour and hearsay only lead to speculation, and eventually to crass, xenophobic comments of the type that have been flying about from Buzzboy amongst others.

If Longhauls views are fairly representative of the VNV's, the gulf is not as wide as it might seem. the fact is that most KLMuk pilots are not interested in KLM mainline flying, and as such would have no problem at all in going in at the bottom of the KLM Mainline list. It is the merger with the KLC list that is the main issue, and if that can be done on a year of joining basis, not many people can argue that that is unfair. KLC originating pilots keep their route into mainline along with the ability to bid for aircraft in a much bigger KLC/KLMuk fleet. Likewise, KLMuk pilots gain a much wider bid range within the combined group, and those that want mainline will get a shot at it in due course, accepting that all current KLC pilots were in the queue before us.

If our F100's or the merger itself are used as a bargaining tool by KLM or VNV, e.g. allowing mainline pilots to bid down into the KLC/KLMuk fleets, at the expense of KLMuk pilots who wouldnt have immediate access to mainline equipment, then that is plainly unfair. This is where KLM and VNV need to promptly show their hand to put all suspicion to an end.

Our other gripes do not concern VNV at all. they are issues for us at KLMuk to resolve directly with management. Pensions and rights of transfer etc are wholly within BALPA's control.

driver1

27th Apr 2002, 11:34

there has been alot discussed on this thread!

I have to agree with Heavy Landing, Buzz Boy does have some good points but doesnt represent all of the pilots at KLMuk.

It has to be said though that it appears through his posts that Longhaul my be vocal in the VNV and if he continues with that attitude it will be nothing but destructive.

Otterman; i do understand your concerns about your seniority, with the many years to command within KLM this is quite understandable. As Heavy Landing says there is alot to be discussed and it would help if the VNV made their intentions clear. I for one favour the idea of a seperate "regional" division list that joins all the KLMuk / Buzz pilots and the existing KLC pilots by date of joining. Then all KLMuk / Buzz pilots are put on the bottom of the master list. This i think protects everyone and is the fairest deal, it allows the existing KLMuk pilot to bid to Buzz or mainline should he so desire, once that choice is made then there is no return, the Buzz pilots can bid vice versa, all existing KLC pilots retain their places on the master list so no KLMuk/Buzz pilot can fly mainline before them.

As to the F100s, well they have been flying the feeder routes for many years now under the KLMuk "regional" banner, i dont think that there could be a reasonable argument from the mainline pilots over their use in the new combined KLC/KLMuk airline, that really would be splitting hairs and cause very bad feeling from the British pilots.

Longhaul, you may consider yourself superior or stronger in your current position, please do not abuse this as it will turn around and bite you in the future, also to make the kind of remarks you have about our cabin crew is very offensive and has nothing to do with what is being discussed here, remember just because you work for a different airline doesnt make you any different, we are all human, have our hopes and dreams and sometimes those dreams have to be modified. Same appies to Buzz Boy.

Lets look to a bright future within the KLM group for all.

Long Haul

27th Apr 2002, 11:57

Heavy Landing,
Thank you for your contribution to this discussion which has calmed me down a bit. I take back what I wrote about you and the other reasonable KLMuk pilots having to reapply to keep their jobs; what we all want is a company where KLC and ex-KLMuk pilots can work together in harmony.
It is true that the VNV is going to use the integration of the KLMuk aircraft into the KLC fleet to try to get it so that current KLM mainline pilots can bid KLC positions. If they don't, as otterman wrote, the union will disintegrate due to the currently very unhappy KLM cruise relief pilots who have seen KLC pilots stream in ahead of them onto the mainline fleet while new-hires come in to fill the first officer vacancies left behind. Although this seems at first to be a setback for you and your colleagues, keep in mind that the new KLC fleet would be twice as large as it is now, with more than twice as many people leaving; instead of only having captaincies become available due to retirements, you would now also have young captains leaving to join KLM mainline. You would also benefit from the fact that KLC can expand their routes in all directions while there are only so many more flights that KLMuk would have added in the coming years between the UK and AMS. Add to that all the many pilots who would, under my scenario, opt to work for Buzz, and the benefit of being on the KLM mainline senority list for the ohh so very few among you who would like that, and I personally don't think that it would be a bad deal for you. What really needs to happen though is for representatives of the VNV and of BALPA to sit down, work the numbers out, and to come up with a solution together. If, at the end of all this, it turns out that you lot are taken advantage of by the VNV then I will apologise here; but for the time being I can assure you that the bestuur of the VNV are wise, reasonable men who understand the problems and emotions involved in this difficult undertaking.

driver1

27th Apr 2002, 12:18

Longhaul;

Although there may be some concerns from the KLM cruise pilots about gaining experience with flying you cannot justify them stepping on existing pilots within KLMuk and KLC, we have turboprop first officers waiting for their jet positions which represent a significat pay rise for them, equally we have turboprop captains and senior jet first officers who have been waiting a long time some up to 9 years for their jet commands, this also represents a significant pay rise.

If as you have stated you wish the KLMuk pilots to be placed onto the bottom of the master list then you cant have it both ways and start taking other peoples dreams from them. If the cruise pilots wish to gain experience with a regional airline then they should be allowed to join the Regional seniority list at the bottom and start on the turboprop and gain very valuable experience from it. of course they can retain their master seniority for the future.

Heavy Landing

27th Apr 2002, 12:44

Long Haul, good to have you back. We need to be able to all discuss this calmly and reasonably.

Perhaps you could clear up the question of whether there is 1 or 2 seniority lists at KLM at the moment. We hear that there is only one list where KLM mainline and KLC pilots are combined, but then we know that there must be another list (real or theoretical) that would apply for example, if a command vacancy came up at KLC (seeing as KLM FO's and Coco's cannot bid down into KLC), i.e. a list composed only of KLC pilots who have not yet crossed over into mainline. This is very important to know before we get too far into how the seniority lists can be merged.

The chain you describe is exactly what most of us fear. The fairity of this chain can be tested by simply asking "who gains and loses what"?

KLM Mainline pilots gain the opportunity to take FO and Command positions on the combined KLC/KLMuk regional airline. They do not however have to give up anything in return because their KLM Mainline seniority position is protected.

KLC pilots gain is difficult to see, other than for F50 FO's looking for jet FO positions, within the combined regional, who now have more aircraft to bid for. What about a KLC FO who is just coming up to command, but who has no interest in Mainline? Suddenly all doors are shut in his or her face by all the experienced FO's bidding down from Mainline. The FO's who do want mainline gain nothing as they still have time and assesment constraints to bidding for mainline equipment.

So, for KLC pilots, the only marginal gain remains within KLC/KLMuk.

And for the KLMuk pilots, unless there is a separate "Regional" seniority list in existence to which we merge, or one is now created, we suffer more badly than our KLC colleagues. Our FO's coming up to command lose out in the same way as their KLC equivalents to Pilots bidding down from Mainline. Our FO's wanting mainline are subject to an even larger time constraint by the fact that we will be joining the KLM mainline list at the bottom of the last KLC pilot. Our existing Captains lose out if the fleet changes, because a more 'senior' FO from mainline can outbid them for any new regional aircraft, and so they face the prospect of a return to the RHS. And so on.

Hopefully, you can see from this, that the only outright winner in what you describe are the mainline FO's and Coco's. This is not the fairest solution possible, and that, I suspect is why even KLC pilots feel somewhat hard done by.

A fairer solution, in my humble opinion, would be this:

Have an overall KLM list, comprising all KLM Mainline pilots as existing, followed by all KLC pilots, and joined now, at the bottom by the KLMuk seniority list. This is the KLM main list.

In parallel, establish a "regional" list, that is comprised of all KLMuk and KLC pilots on a date of joining basis. Any mainline FO's and Coco's wishing "regional" positions can also join this list, but at the bottom, after all KLC and KLMuk pilots.

This is the starting point. we can now discuss what constraints etc apply to either list.

The experienced mainline Fo's who want regional positions get the opportunity, but only after all KLC/KLMuk pilots who are also suitably qualified and waiting for command. only fair.

The Mainline Coco's get regional FO positions, similarly without disadvantaging existing regional pilots.

If "You were the boss of KLM or the VNV", Longhaul, would you not then go one step further and do the exceptionally fair thing of then removing all artificial restraints on both lists? Like letting everyone bid for anything from day one? If that happened, then the chain would work to near perfection, and would offer opportunities to all

As experienced pilots stream from Mainline to take regional positions, so there would be a stream in the opposite direction, of KLC/KLMuk pilots taking mainline positions without having to wait 5 or 6 years just for the opportunity.

As Fo's stream to mainline, a path is opened for your Coco's to take FO positions at the regional.

Everybody wins. Those who dont want to migrate are protected by their seniority on the relevant list, and those who do, get the opportunity.

You'll note that I havent said anything about Buzz here. That is because whether we get rights of transfer to Buzz is really for negotiation between us and the KLMuk Management. It doesnt involve the Dutch pilots or the VNV.

Heavy Landing

27th Apr 2002, 12:46

driver1,

you beat me to it,.........and with fewer words too! :)

Long Haul

28th Apr 2002, 19:43

Heavy Landing,
The scenario which you describe sounds in principle fair to me; and I believe that most of my colleagues within the VNV would agree. I don't think that it is anyone's intention to stagnate the careers of your pilots by allowing KLM mainline pilots to bid KLC positions. The problem, however, is that under your proposal KLC pilots would enter KLM with full senority and KLM pilots would enter KLC with none. This is because the KLC pilots are already on the KLM master senority list and so they cannot be rescheduled below existing KLM pilots and above KLMuk pilots, as you suggest. The answer to your question is that there is only one list now; how that came about is a long story which I will try to summarize without boring the casual viewer.

A pilot hired by KLC prior to 1996 would have been told that he or she, after 8 years, could transfer to KLM (assuming they passed the assessment) with 4 years senority. In 1996 the VNV, which represents both KLM and KLC, negotiated a new agreement which stated that newly hired KLC pilots would, from July 1997, be immediately placed on a new, combined senority list and could now after six years transfer to KLM with full senority. All KLC pilots who were in service prior to '97, including those who previously did not pass the assessment, were placed on the new list with half-senority. This was a step-up for them, but lots of junior KLM pilots were unhappy about the situation because more KLC pilots appeared above them on the list than what was previously expected. The unhappiest of all were some of the students of the KLM Flight Academy who graduated around 1996. At that time the best students of each class were offered places at KLM and the rest at KLC or other airlines. Those who had qualified to go to KLM had to wait a while before they could begin, but they didn't mind because they expected to be going to a better paying job. What ended up happening, however, was that those who went to KLC could begin right away, and due to the new agreement ended up above the KLM guys on the new list. Some pilots had schoolmates who had graduated more than a year behind them end up far above them on the senority list! And then, to make matters worst, came the terrible stagnation of the past four years on KLM mainline. There has been in the last few years so little training that we have all started rusting to our seats. Meanwhile, at KLC, the disappearance of Braathens and Eurowings as feeders meant a great expansion there. Because no one within the VNV thought, in the good times of 1996, to make it possible for KLM pilots to bid KLC positions, the young KLM pilots saw their classmates who had gone to KLC, and the pilots hired years after they were upgrade quickly. And so what we now have is a situation where KLC pilots with three years senority who are captains, have, during the course of their careers, earned twice as much as KLM pilots with six years! And, more importantly, have been doing a lot of great flying whilst the KLM pilots are still Co-Co s! The VNV considers this an unacceptable situation, and under pressure from the junior KLM pilots, the current president and vice-president were elected under the banner of "integrate the two companies", or "make KLC positions available to KLM pilots." They knew, however, that in order for KLM to agree to this, they would need a bargaining chip; and that bargaining chip was called the Fokker 100.
The F100 is, in Holland, a KLM mainline aircraft. We had a fleet of them before, and they were flown by mainline pilots with mainline salaries. The scope clause in our contract precludes KLC from operating them because they have more than 100 seats. When KLC got F70s they wanted to have F100s too, because the pilots could fly both. So, two years ago when KLM asked the VNV if they could use the F100 at Cityhopper, the VNV said, "Sure; if we now complete the integration and make all positions biddable by all pilots and integrate the salary structure (junior KLM pilots are paid by salary, not by flight hour, and the major determinant is position on the senority list, not what type one flys, unless one is a captain). All of a sudden KLC didn't need to fly the F100 anymore. Everything then went quiet on the integration front, although a simmering anger could be felt from the junior KLM pilots who continued to ask their union leaders why KLC continued to hire new pilots, some even as direct entry captains, when so many of them would love to work there and considering the fact that we were now supposed to be one big happy family.

And now KLC wants to fly the F100 again (albiet your F100s, which I think used to be ours!), and again they will need permission from the VNV to do this. You will say that the F100s fly the system already, so what difference will it make; the difference is that when operated by a regional partner such as KLMuk, there are restrictions in place in the contract as to how many aircraft there can be and where they can be flown. KLC does not have those restrictions. So, you see, by granting permission for KLC to use the F100s, the VNV leaders can finally fufill their election promise of integrating the two groups once and for all. It is an opportunity which they cannot afford to pass up.

So, which way further? Unfortunately (or luckily) I am not personally involved in the negotiations. We have mentioned here a few of the possibilities. Another is to arrange it so that KLM mainline pilots can only transfer to KLC as F/Os, not as captains. But ironically I have now come to the conclusion that the bestuur of the VNV needs to forget about integrating KLM and KLC altogether. For one, I don't see any easy way around your objections to KLM mainline pilots taking KLC positions, and secondly, in the period of expansion on KLM mainline upon which we are about to embark, KLC pilots will again benefit more than junior KLM pilots because they would, under an integrated career path structure, be able to bid over to KLM before the normal six years in service was concluded! Almost all of the die-hard co-cos will soon become co-pilots on the 737, whereas if the integration goes through those positions will go to KLC pilots.

All in all it is an incredible mess in which you all happen to be caught up in, but I hope that I have been able to convince some KLMuk pilots that the members of the VNV are fair people who are not out to screw you. Yesterday I heard it again from one of your colleagues that they had seen it in writing that the VNV wanted to put them at the bottom of the list and they were going to fight it blah, blah blah. That is simply not true. I remain convinced that our negotiating team will use good faith and try their utmost to come up with a solution which will upset the most of us the least.

Heavy Landing

28th Apr 2002, 22:48

The problem, however, is that under your proposal KLC pilots would enter KLM with full senority and KLM pilots would enter KLC with none.
True, but lets not forget that such a KLM Pilot will still have their mainline seniority number to protect them. The issue of seniority will also be largely academic to them for 2 reasons
1. the lack of seniority will not hamper the opportunity for experienced KLM Pilots to take commands at KLC. They will probably have higher hours / experience than most FO’s at KLC so wont have too long to wait, and if they don’t, or if there is a suitably qualified KLC pilot already awaiting a position, it is only fair that the KLC pilot get first shot.
2. Coco’s will similarly have mainline seniority number protection, and on the assumption that mainline is their preference anyway, they will only have to bide their time at KLC (doing actual flying) until a desirable mainline position becomes available

This is because the KLC pilots are already on the KLM master senority list and so they cannot be rescheduled below existing KLM pilots and above KLMuk pilots, as you suggest.
Sorry, you might have misunderstood me here. I don’t mean a rescheduling of the list. In effect, what I am suggesting is that KLMuk merge immediately below the last KLC pilot on the master seniority list as of 1st April 2002. This does not upset whatever is going on or has gone on in the past above us, but will only really be fair if a separate regional list is started, to which we and KLC merge on a date of joining basis.

The answer to your question is that there is only one list now; how that came about is a long story which I will try to summarize without boring the casual viewer.
Thanks for that. Very informative, and you’re right, it sounds a bit of a mess.

So, two years ago when KLM asked the VNV if they could use the F100 at Cityhopper, the VNV said, "Sure; if we now complete the integration and make all positions biddable by all pilots and integrate the salary structure
Well, if the VNV are still of this opinion, and they are willing to concede that as KLMuk are bringing the F100’s that are the subject of discussion, to the party, they should be part of the integration (not after KLM/KLC have agreed the final master seniority list, but rather, accepting that we are now talking 3-way integration) we have a workable platform on which to negotiate

So, you see, by granting permission for KLC to use the F100s, the VNV leaders can finally fufill their election promise of integrating the two groups once and for all. It is an opportunity which they cannot afford to pass up.

…………but in the process of granting that “permission”, the VNV have widened the scope beyond the ‘two groups’ they campaigned for election on. There are now 3 groups affected. Most reasonable people will appreciate that, including the junior KLM pilots. There has already been one almighty mess created from the events of 1996 you described. This is an opportunity not to create another one. It will be a much better outcome for all 3 parties to gain a bit and maybe lose a bit than for an outright scoop of all the winnings for the junior pilots because they have been “promised” it by the VNV. Situations and business environments change……surely the VNV can be flexible to match.

So, which way further? Unfortunately (or luckily) I am not personally involved in the negotiations. We have mentioned here a few of the possibilities.
Neither am I, luckily. I don’t envy the job they have.

Another is to arrange it so that KLM mainline pilots can only transfer to KLC as F/Os, not as captains.
Not sure about this, because this now introduces the kind of unfair restriction on KLM pilots as we are trying to get rid of for KLC and KLMuk pilots.

But ironically I have now come to the conclusion that the bestuur of the VNV needs to forget about integrating KLM and KLC altogether.
As they say, the simple solutions are sometimes the best. I think it would be easier to get an agreement between KLMuk and KLC pilots if we were talking only about a KLC Regional seniority list.

Dutchie

29th Apr 2002, 08:31

I am pleased to read that we are getting somewhere with this thread!! Having played the devils advocat in the beginning I start to see light at the end of the tunnel.... :o

ooizcalling

30th Apr 2002, 13:06

I find a lot in Long Hauls post that angers me. To give an example;

Re the students ".... who graduated around 1996. At that time the best students of each class were offered places at KLM and the rest at KLC or other airlines" .

Note the 'Put Down' of KLC and Other Airlines ! Pathetic ! (KLMuk and Buzz, I guess you would qualify for 'other' here !)

Here's an alternative story. Similar time period. At the time the students graduated there were no jobs available. Then 'cityhopper' required some pilots. The best of the group were offered the available positions. About nine months later, those that were unsuccessfull with the cityhopper recruitment were recruited directly into KLM when KLM mainline started recuiting again.

Now, when the group that were recruited FIRST by KLM into the 'cityhopper' division finish their 6 years in KLC and are eligible to move across to one of the other 'mainline' divisions, quess what ? They will have to lose half there seniority in the move, ending up 3 years further down the list from those recruited from their same class but almost a year later than them !

If that's not discrimination, what is ? And it continues NOW, so be careful you guy's and gals in the UK. Despite some very promising posts in this thread this is the sort of mentality you'll have to deal with when dealing with the VNV.

Wet Power

30th Apr 2002, 18:14

And what happens when, a year or two down the line, KLM decide that they have got a couple of hundred too many pilots due to fleet rationalization?

Those couple of hundred pilots nearest the bottom of the KLM seniority list will be the ones that are laid off - guess who they will be!

ooizcalling

1st May 2002, 08:42

No, I dont think so 'Wet Power'. Any intergration well thought out should cover those points in a watertight manner. Any cut backs in the KLM mainline division should be handled by stand-downs in that division and any cutbacks in the proposed KLMuk,KLC,Buzz operation should be covered by cutbacks in that division.

The final text of the intergration aggrement should reflect those options and how they are to be handled. Just make sure that the final aggrement says exactly what you ment it to say with no room for other interpretations, because if it is worded too loosely it may be turned to work against you.

Remember too that you are approaching this from two different legal backgrounds;

The U.K. 'Adversarial' system with its 'letter of the law' approach, case history references etc. ....and

The Dutch 'Napoleonic' system which (supposedly) works on the 'principle' within the document presented rarther than the specific text, and therfore case histories do not necessarily apply. Furthermore the Dutch language is not as comprehensive as the English language and so one word can have different meanings dependant on the percieved context of its setting. This can be interperated differently by different legal people and I've seen some amazing findings from an apparently clear presentation.

Therefore the need to have the document of intergration say EXACTLY what you MEAN it to say, and as it will probably have to be in the Dutch Language, this is no easy task.

Good luck to you all.

driver1

3rd May 2002, 08:56

Heavy Landing;

Very well put, the more that i think about it and the more that is said on here it is becoming obvious that the only way to go is to have two seniority lists.

The integration into KLM mainline is far to complex and emotive, i for one would back all the way a KLC/KLMuk single list based on date of joining.

Those that have KLM mainline right should be allowed to keep those rights, however to add the KLMuk pilots to the bottom of the main list i think should be open to negotiation, I for one do not consider it important to me.

driver1

3rd May 2002, 09:32

Longhaul;

Just to put the record straight about the F100s history in AirUK/KLMuk.

AirUK have operated the F100 since 1992 and had 11 aircraft in the fleet 7 were ex canadian aircraft and 4 came from the defunct air Europe. we also operated 7 boeing 737-400 aircraft for charter.

When KLM bought AirUK and and renamed it KLMuk the 7 boeing 737-400s were transfered to KLM mainline initially operated by airuk pilots, but due to objections by KLM pilots the aircraft were put on the dutch register and operated by KLM mainline crews.

KLMs 6 Fokker 100 aircraft were then transefered to KLMuk, however two were very quickly sold by KLM to Montenegro airlines.

Todays fleet is made up of 11 ex Airuk F100 aircraft plus 4 ex KLM aircraft.

We lost 7 737s and gained 4 F100s at the end of the day!!

A Very Civil Pilot

6th May 2002, 12:46

So when our a/c get transferred to the Dutch register, will the UK pilots get elbowed out of the scene if KLM pilots like the look of what is on offer?

Hoover Pilot

9th May 2002, 22:03

Long Haul,

Thanks for your last post.

Not only does it explain the history of the KLM/KLC seniority list saga but I am also pleased to hear your wishes for a fair solution to the problem we are all caught up in.

However, could you please clarify the situation with regard to KLC operating F100s?

We have had a meeting with EVG and FVP regarding the changes to KLMuk and EVG said that there is no scope clause preventing KLC operating F100s. She said the only reason they don't is that she cannot agree a suitable pay scale with the VNV. Ie the problem is only salary and not a scope clause restriction. Is this true?

HP
KLMuk

driver1

12th May 2002, 16:34

Have any of you guys at KLM mainline or KLMcityhopper been told of any developments? (otterman?Longhaul?)

As usual the silence from KLMuk is disturbing!

All we have is rumours of the NWI flights transfering to jet equipment and the re-introduction of the ABZ-SVG route dropped by Pallant a few years ago, poss to be operated by the F70.

Otterman

13th May 2002, 09:08

Driver1. No there is nothing but silence. When the numbers for 2001/2002 were presented the CEO gave a bit away about what he would like to do.

But in the Netherlands things don't happen all that quickly. I am sure talks are going on behind the scenes on this topic. But I don't expect anything substantial to happen for awhile.

I also have requested some information that relates to the Fokker 100. KLC can't fly them without breaking agreements with the VNV. I am just trying to find out how the scope clause is worded. Before KLMuk took the ex-KLM Fokker 100's they were operated by KLM mainline pilots at KLM mainline wages. KLC was operating the Fokker 70 at that time as well. I know KLM wanted KLC to operate them, but it was a no go for our union. Even KLM mainline supplying 6 complete crews for a common Fokker 70/100 pool was a no go. The number of seats in the Fokker 100 precludes regional payscales as things stand right now. If KLC/KLMuk merge this problem would rear its head again. Once again there are solutions, one of which will fit this situation, but it is not realistic for people to expect the VNV to play ostrich. They aren't. That is not why I pay dues.

As far as the silence being disturbing. I don't know I have had to get my company news out of the newspaper like everyone else for 14 years now.

Micawber

16th May 2002, 09:23

All real comany news is first in De Telegraf as usual, hope some of the issues are sorted out soon. I suggest you don't hold your breath waiting for the VNV....Hell only freezes rarely.... Good luck guys keep your heads up with EVG............

Dutchie

20th May 2002, 09:26

While talking about the Telegraaf(which is a dutch mix of the times with the Sun.. (I never buy it but only read it at the hairdresser.. of course ;) )

They had this interesting topic

Stormloop bij nieuwe
bond voor piloten

AMSTERDAM - Een groep verontruste verkeersvliegers heeft uit onvrede met het monopolie van hun huidige vakbond, de Vereniging Nederlandse Verkeersvliegers (VNV), een tweede pilotenbond opgericht.

Wat it is saying that there is a new pilot union in the netherlands because a lot of pilots dont feel that the VNV monopoly is representing them properly... Where did I hear that before... somewhere in a topic about KLC and KL UK????

Anyway I will look into it and come back with some more info later..:D

Otterman

22nd May 2002, 10:25

Just received an answer to my scope clause question from the union. It appears that the situation has changed with regards to scope when it comes to KLM/KLC. We now have one seniority list and this means that we are one pilot group. The pilots who fly for KLC work under a separate contract from the mainline contract (referred to as amendment 21, employment with KLC). With this situation the 100 seat mark became history. If either KLM or KLC decides to add a new aircraft to its fleet it has to enter negotiations with the VNV to come to an agreement where this new aircraft is placed and scaled as far as salary, work-rules, and pilot career path is concerned.

So the information that Hoover Pilot received from his people is absolutely correct there is nothing preventing KLC from operating the Fokker 100 except that the VNV and KLC/KLM management can’t agree where to place this aircraft in the scheme of things. And of course this problem doesn’t go away with any integration of the KLC/KLMuk fleets. No other news to report from our side of the fence. Regards. Otterman

driver1

22nd May 2002, 22:20

Thanx for the information Otterman;

As to the F100, please remind the VNV that very soon the KLMuk pilots will be part of the KLM/KLC pilot force, so any negotiations regarding pay for this fleet MUST include us as we are the operators!

There is still much talk about the seniority issue at KLMuk and in general the feeling is that a second "regional list" is regarded as the best option. I dont think that the pilots here would ever accept being just added to the bottom of the list as many have 15 years plus service.

We talked some time ago about arranging some kind of social function to get the KLM and KLMuk guys together informally, any suggestions??

Regards.

Hoover Pilot

24th May 2002, 11:53

Otterman, thanks for the info.

The question of scope was largely academic in that KLC pilots cannot operate the F100 without VNV agreement.

BUT if KLC could not operate the F100 because the scope clause absolutely forbids it due to capacity (more than 100 seats) then as soon as they become part of the KLC fleet they technically would become grounded for both KLC AND KLMuk pilots.

IF however, the F100 could be flown by KLC but the VNV needs to be involved to agree salary, career progression etc etc then when they do become part of the KLC fleet there is nothing in the scope clause to prevent KLMuk pilots from still operating them as we are currently doing.

Granted, all parties will have lots to say when the F100 does become part of the KLC fleet but since you say the seat restriction part of the scope clause does not now apply then at least the aircraft would not be immeadiately grounded. For KLC pilots to operate them though the VNV still have to agree to terms.

HP

Otterman

24th May 2002, 15:25

Can’t see them being grounded whatever happens. That is not the Dutch way. But if there is integration of KLMuk/KLC than it is too simple to say that there is no problem.

There are synergies to be had for management otherwise they wouldn’t even contemplate doing this integration. IF there were integration I would think the same situation applies with the KLM/KLC integration. We wouldn’t be talking about two pilot groups but one. So KLMuk pilots would be considered KLM pilots (leaving the whole seniority integration of how, when and why aside). So the situation at the new regional wouldn’t be any different in regards to the Fokker 100. It would have to be negotiated with the VNV. Granted of course that you guys are already flying them.

If there would be a solution which would entail two lists one regional and one KLM mainline, with KLC guys occupying a spot on both, the situation would be different once again. I would tend to see the problem reverting back to the pre KLM/KLC merger case where this merged company can’t operate any aircraft with more than a 100 seat design. The KLC guys having the best of both worlds might turn out to be more in favour for this scope, because the pay and benefits on the European fleet at KLM are higher than at KLC, and they can transfer to the mainline.

If I know my company and union a bit this it what I could see happening. I can see the Fokker 100 being grand-fathered to this new entity. The fleet frozen, that way the “problem” would solve itself over time. There are cases of this happening at other regional carriers. And it would do justice to all I believe. But as I have noticed in the past in this discussion, my glasses are definitely coloured by my position at KLM mainline. Regards Otterman.