Easy Jet-no friend of the environment

[pax britanica]

EasyJet -like all good companies claims to do its best for the environment but again like most companies aspects of this policy seem to be ignored or countered by other policies

This is what their Corporate web site says

Waste management

easyJet seeks to recycle as much waste as possible. On-board, easyJet has a two-bag waste collection system which separates recyclable material such as newspapers, plastic bottles and metal cans from general waste. We do not have control of the final management of on-board waste which is dependent on the facilities at each airport where waste is collected by local cleaning and ground handling contractors. easyJet also has recycling in place in its offices and hangars around its network.
A working group has been established to look at how easyJet can reduce waste across the airline’s operations. The group is considering all aspects of easyJet’s operations and in particular on-board waste. This includes working with easyJet’s supply chain, including Airbus, to identify potential on-board solutions and Gate Gourmet to reduce waste arising from the sale of on board food and beverages. The group is seeking improvements which will also engage staff and customers in the process of waste reduction.


Well it seems from another thread on Pprune that their engagement with staff on reducing waste is to order them to throw away all unused food and if they help themselves to as much as one unused sandwich headed for the rubbish sack then its the employee who gets the sack not the waste company.

Says a lot about any company that while they obviously want to stop pilfering (paying your staff fairly is usually a good way) sacking people for eating left over sandwiches so they are just thrown out and not recycled and completley wasted does just have tinge of hypocrisy about it

[SWBKCB]

they help themselves

pilfering

Anybody work for a company where stealing isn't regarded as Gross Misconduct and will get you the sack?

p.s. - recycled sandwiches?

[crablab]

Anybody work for a company where stealing isn't regarded as Gross Misconduct and will get you the sack?

I think the point was that these sandwiches were headed for the bin, and thus it would a) be more environmentally friendly b) nice for the staff, if they were allowed to consume an unwanted item of food.

[canberra97]

Crab lab

But where do you draw the line in circumstances like that, unless it was authorised by the company it will still be seen as 'stealing or pilfering' which ever way you look at it regardless of the fact that they might be heading for the bin it's still a matter of Gros Misconduct and therefore could be a sackable offence.

At 18 you have a lot to learn about working practices and employment T&Cs.

[crablab]

Crab lab

But where do you draw the line in circumstances like that, unless it was authorised by the company it will still be seen as 'stealing or pilfering' which ever way you look at it regardless of the fact that they might be heading for the bin it's still a matter of Gros Misconduct and therefore could be a sackable offence.

At 18 you have a lot to learn about working practices and employment T&Cs.
Oh indeed - but maybe if the company likes to follow rules to the letter, they can add an exception?

Maybe - but I do run my own company.

[canberra97]

Oh indeed - but maybe if the company likes to follow rules to the letter, they can add an exception?

Maybe - but I do run my own company.

With a company employing the amount of people that Easyjet do there would be no exceptions to the employees T&C and a company the size of Easyjet would have to make sure the that the staff 'follow rules to the letter' otherwise it's Gross Misconduct.

I'm sure at 18 'your company' doesn't employ 1000s of people.

[crablab]

With a company employing the amount of people that Easyjet do there would be no exceptions to the employees T&C and a company the size of Easyjet would have to make sure the that the staff 'follow rules to the letter' otherwise it's Gross Misconduct.

I'm sure at 18 'your company' doesn't employ 1000s of people.
My point was rather that they could, given the will power, write this into their Ts&Cs...

Nope, but I don't see the need to be disparaging. You can look it up if you want: 09755360

[canberra97]

But why would Easyjet or any other company want to rewrite this in their T&Cs when it can easily be abused.

[paully]

Don`t worry Crablab, from personal experience they treat their customers that way, as well. Then they wonder why pax numbers are falling :ugh:

[ezycrew]

The food doesn't go in the bin, any unsold food get placed back into the cool bag and returned to the caters for proper disposal.

Best to know the facts before getting on your soap box

[inOban]

Our local supermarket gives their remaining perishable food to the local soup kitchen. I'm also sure that I remember that some had a policy of letting staff purchase short-date food for a nominal amount, but not free.

[HeartyMeatballs]

easyJet passengers are rising and load factors are over 90% with passengers rising 6.6% year on year between December 2015 and 2016.

[pwalhx]

I once had to terminate the employment of one of my staff working in a logistics warehouse for helping himself to a pair of socks with a trade value of £0.99. I was a subject of some abuse from his colleague who said but they were only worth 99p. My response was to ask them to clarify at what financial amount does it then become stealing.

[inOban]

Well it appears that the bosses of FTSE companies can trouser millions without any evidence that they have earned, ie deserved, it.

[HeartyMeatballs]

Indeed. They cost the companies they work tens of millions of pounds in mismanagement yet still walk away with millions themselves. They even change the goalposts to protect their own bonuses whilst denying frontline staff any bonus of their own.

[paully]

Hearty Meatballs...

Back in June they were putting that story out, then issued a profit warning a couple of days later, blaming it on Brexit, which raised the brokers eyebrows.

Then in October they issued another profit warning and revealed profits were down 28%..sure pax numbers were up but obviously little yield from them. My point is many of the loyal yield raising pax had left them, more numbers replacing at rock bottom rates isnt good for business..

Anyway back to mouldy sarnies..much more interesting :ok:

[Thad Jarvis]

The point made in tribunal was that the accused CA wasn't actually stealing. She didn't set out that day with the primary aim of pilfering a bacon roll. The only guilt appears to be use of initiative (largely frowned upon in easyJet)
Anyone who has endured Easyjet crew food will tell you the passenger offering is 500% better than that given to crew yet daily crew are forced to bin anything leftover. Most of the crew food gets binned nowadays as very few will touch it.

[DC9_10]

The cabin manager made a decision to give the crew member a baguette as the crew member had a nut allergy and she was not catered for the duty. Had the cabin manager recorded this on the CFR for that day's duty, I don't think this would have went as far as it did.

[pax britanica]

Having started the thread as little social experiment that making it an environmental rather than HR isse might get more atention

So what has been demonstrated

1 policies must be adhered to -well unless you are exec levels ian company
2 many people today are heartless bastards and think it is OK or sensible to sack people for this kind of thing, No reason at all why she should not have got verbal warning
3 managers-or thosewho apply the rules (not managers in my book no better than supervisors but thats an old fashioned term) do nott hink of the consequences-easyjet end up in employment court and look
1 nasty and cheap
2 Mean spirited
3 just plain silly
4 Not a good company to work for

4 In a world of waste chucking away food is poor practice unless it is unfit or out of date and makes easyjet look even more Orange than green

So a fair bit of publicity for Ez and all of it negative, perhaps if they paid their staff properly and did not treat them with contempt-see comments about crew food maybe pilfering would drop substantially

5 I was on EZ in December and on the return flight they had forgotten to put a large portion of the BoB food on board, would the responsible person have been sacked for that

[Barling Magna]

I once had to terminate the employment of one of my staff working in a logistics warehouse for helping himself to a pair of socks with a trade value of £0.99. I was a subject of some abuse from his colleague who said but they were only worth 99p. My response was to ask them to clarify at what financial amount does it then become stealing.

I take it you are joking? Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men. No manager worth his salt would sack an employee for such an offence - they would receive a formal warning - unless there was an ulterior motive (along the lines of imprisoning Al Capone for tax offences which could be proven rather than for murder and extortion which could not).

[pamann]

Isn't BOB food returned to catering/bonded store as a stock check and count before being disposed of? This isn't to protect the food from being eaten by staff, but to stop dishonest staff perhaps pocketing the money and writing off the goods by Saying 'X' amount were thrown away when actually they were sold as cash in-flight.

[racedo]

I take it you are joking? Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men. No manager worth his salt would sack an employee for such an offence - they would receive a formal warning - unless there was an ulterior motive (along the lines of imprisoning Al Capone for tax offences which could be proven rather than for murder and extortion which could not).


Hope he wasn't.

Someone taking a 99p item today feels they can get away with it, at what point it time does it stop ? £99 or £999.

[inOban]

Get real. Is there an office where no-one ever prints or copies a personal document? Or a manager who faithfully declares all the private miles in their company car? It's the same as stealing a pair of socks.

[Porky Speedpig]

I agree with Racedo - most large scale frauds start off as very small ones. Also if you wanted to sack someone for stealing, say £1000, and s/he could point out that you turned a blind eye to smaller sums, you would not have a leg to stand on

[DaveReidUK]

Also if you wanted to sack someone for stealing, say £1000, and s/he could point out that you turned a blind eye to smaller sums, you would not have a leg to stand on

Where did the OP suggest "turning a blind eye" ?

No manager worth his salt would sack an employee for such an offence - they would receive a formal warning

[NorthSouth]

I appreciate we're now in a post-truth society but I hadn't heard that the fundamental rules of trade and ownership had been changed.

Easyjet offers sandwich for sale
Customer pays Easyjet for sandwich
Easyjet transfers said sandwich to customer
Customer is now the owner of sandwich
Customer decides not to eat the sandwich and leaves it on plane

At what point does the ownership of that sandwich revert to Easyjet? Because if it's not Easyjet's sandwich how can an employee be "stealing" it from Easyjet?

Maybe the small print is like these finance deals you get on cars nowadays where you never actually own the car, just borrow it from the owners for a while.

[crablab]

At what point does the ownership of that sandwich revert to Easyjet? Because if it's not Easyjet's sandwich how can an employee be "stealing" it from Easyjet?


I expect it it's in Easyjet's contract with the passenger - "if you leave stuff on our plane it automatically becomes ours" :ugh:

[pwalhx]

I wasn't joking, operating a logistics warehouse you are in a position of trust and responsible for goods that are ultimately owned by someone else.

It was company policy to operate a zero tolerance to any form of pilfering be it 1p or £1000.

You say we should have given a warning for stealing a 99p pair of socks, if that same person had stolen a £500 dress from the same customer would that equally have merited just a warning.

[HeartyMeatballs]

If you leave stuff on the plane it automatically becomes lost property and is offloaded.

[DaveReidUK]

If you leave stuff on the plane it automatically becomes lost property and is offloaded.

And the owner has six months to reclaim his/her half-eaten sandwich ...

[SWBKCB]

Not heard the line about it being left by a customer, but the EZY line in the tribunal was that if you didn't have a receipt, you hadn't paid for it so it was stolen.

While I appreciate that on board theft has been a major concern for airlines for years, EZY haven't covered themselves in glory here.

[Barling Magna]

You say we should have given a warning for stealing a 99p pair of socks, if that same person had stolen a £500 dress from the same customer would that equally have merited just a warning.

No, that would constitute a significant theft and I would fire him or her.

Following the formal warning for the 99p pilfering any repetition would lead to immediate dismissal, even if it was again for only a trivial amount. It's a question of scale and proportionate response. Zero tolerance schemes take any human judgement element out of it, if that's what you want then it logically leads to a return to the so-called "Bloody Code" of the 18th Century when there were over 220 offences for which the penalty was death, including the theft of any item over one shilling, which was equivalent to about £25 in today's currency.

The point I'm making is that, in my opinion, a business should not be run as if it were an army unit where stern, inflexible discipline is essential. A business's major resource is its staff. If you treat staff in a draconian way they will have no real respect for you other than the fear of losing their job and they will not enjoy their work (even in a warehouse) and give of their best. An employer has a duty of care towards his or her employees. Let's consider two scenarios - if the sock thief is a young man then he needs to learn the lesson that pilfering is not tolerated without disciplinary action being taken; if the sock thief is an older, experienced employee with an unimpeachable record up to that time then there may well be something wrong with him. In both cases you could simply fire these guys but if you used your own experience and judgement of people you might decide on a better way such as, as I said before, a formal warning.

A touch of humanity in management and in dealing with employees is not a sign of weakness but a sign of strength. It can be a key factor in building trust and reinforcing the company's commitment to its employees and can help improve staff retention, motivation, boost productivity and encourage greater employee engagement with the company which will only help the bottom line in the end.

[inOban]

Very well said.

Can I also say that the biggest deterrent to any economic crime is the likelihood of being caught, not the punishment meeted out to those who are unlucky enough to be caught.

[racedo]

The point I'm making is that, in my opinion, a business should not be run as if it were an army unit where stern, inflexible discipline is essential. A business's major resource is its staff. If you treat staff in a draconian way they will have no real respect for you other than the fear of losing their job and they will not enjoy their work (even in a warehouse) and give of their best. An employer has a duty of care towards his or her employees. Let's consider two scenarios - if the sock thief is a young man then he needs to learn the lesson that pilfering is not tolerated without disciplinary action being taken; if the sock thief is an older, experienced employee with an unimpeachable record up to that time then there may well be something wrong with him. In both cases you could simply fire these guys but if you used your own experience and judgement of people you might decide on a better way such as, as I said before, a formal warning.

An employee gettig caught with a 99p pair of socks is not proof they have never done it before, all it is proof of they have never been caught before.

A ZERO tolerance policy is explained on induction, reiterated at staff meetings and notices around in common wotk areas.

The fact you ignore means it is best off you not working there.

[JosuaNkomo]

"So a fair bit of publicity for Ez and all of it negative, perhaps if they paid their staff properly and did not treat them with contempt-see comments about crew food maybe pilfering would drop substantially"

Pilfering is not acceptable. Given how hard it is to sack people these days I would suggest this was possibly the "straw that broke the camels back" Pilfering passenger food also "eats in to" staff commission.

Although i dont eat it crew food is better than in the past.

With regard to pay, basic is OK, but commission can ramp up take home appreciably. Some who left for BA have applied to come back as their take home with easy was better than BA.

[businessair75]

The sad issue here, from what i can make out, is that the crew member had a nut allergy, she was working in Europe (away from base) and so will have had difficulty in sourcing her own food with her being in a hotel. Under those circumstances, there is no way that she should have been fired or even disciplined. If that was the scenario anyway. It should have been noted on the flight report though.

Stealing stock, regardless of cost, is stealing though and you cannot differentiate between the low value and high value..... regardless of how tempting it is to do so. How many of us would be incensed if the theft of our clapped out M-Reg fiesta was disregarded by the police in stark contrast to your neighbours BMW 5 series being nicked?

As for easyJet crew pay. After your first year, your actual take home pay is particularly good. Depending where in the UK you are based, a junior crew member earns 24-26K before tax whilst a cabin manager is on circa 29-32K per annum. (Average UK salary is 28K) Those rates are made up of...

Basic Salary
Sector Pay (Pay for actually operating flights)
Commission (this is what can make differences depending on base-certain bases, generally Northern ones, offer greater commission)

With that in mind, there is no reason to believe that crew are so poorly paid they have to steal. JosuaNkomo is indeed correct when I says that in the early days of 'mixed fleet' easyJet lost crew to BA and they saw a substantial difference to their pay.

[HeartyMeatballs]

A cabin manager I know made £2400 net one month in summer. Not bad at all. You rarely hear people complain about their wage at easyJet.

[rowly6339]

Easy don't recycle anyway it all goes to landfill, well anything ex MAN does as I know the driver who does this run.

[AerRyan]

This thread has honestly lost me.

[easyflyer83]

Yeah, I cleared over £2500 after tax one month last summer as cabin manager. An exceptional month admittedly but contrary to popular belief, the pay at an LCC can be pretty good.

[pax britanica]

Thank you Barling Magna for so eloquently expressing the sentiments I had when starting this thread.

I am retired now and while I miss the challenges and camaraderie of work at times I honestly do not feel I could deal with the draconian/Stalinist/Nazi HR policies so many employers seem to use without a hint of self awareness or basic human decency on all manner of issues. Just because there is policy on something doesn't mean the remedy is appropriate in every circumstance.

Things like zero hours contracts while the owners evade income tax ( please do not quote evade /avoid subtleties because the words mean exactly the same thing in English ) or take all kinds of corporate goodies and events from suppliers and clients that the 'troops' never see.

If you thin k I am being harsh on Easyjet and their policies it is because they do not seem to me to be well balanced. A couple of years ago when my wife and daughter were taking an EZ flight for the first time, I sent them a 'little old lady' message asking if they gave sufficient attention to safety as they undercut BA . of course i got back the usual corporate speak about safety is the first and highest priority but got no reply at all to my follow up which asked , if that was the case why was it not a designated responsibility of any of their board members.