Virgin FSM's to be axed
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
strikertworedshoes you'll remember that at the end of the rather nasty episode back in January the Union and the Company agreed to enter further discussions about the whole cabin crew situation. Since then, the rapid rise of oil prices (and thus the cost of fuel - our biggest bill) and the pressures on the whole world's economy (which reduces passengers' ability to spend on air travel) have conspired to make making a profit a lot more difficult - and, without making a profit, an airline cannot survive.
Hence there will be some intense discussions going on about how to reduce costs. Staffing is the next largest cost after fuel, so there will be lots of 'what if...?' type discussions going on within the Company - and the Union. One of the 'what ifs..?' will be, 'what if we reduce the number of CSS positions on the aircraft?' - and also, 'what if we reduce the number of cabin crew on the aircraft?'. On top of that, there will be, 'what if we reduce the number of office staff/check-in staff/engineers/what-have-you?', coupled with seeking ideas for replacing people with automation (like internet check-in) wherever possible. Inevitably, some of these ideas and discussions will get leaked - and some will be dreamt up by inveterate Galley FM broadcasters.
The fact that you've heard something doesn't mean it's true, as you should remember from the strike period. Ideas for cutting costs are being talked about. Most won't get actioned, but some will. Which ones? We can't know that until the Company makes the appropriate announcements. All you can do, for now, is wait and see.
Hence there will be some intense discussions going on about how to reduce costs. Staffing is the next largest cost after fuel, so there will be lots of 'what if...?' type discussions going on within the Company - and the Union. One of the 'what ifs..?' will be, 'what if we reduce the number of CSS positions on the aircraft?' - and also, 'what if we reduce the number of cabin crew on the aircraft?'. On top of that, there will be, 'what if we reduce the number of office staff/check-in staff/engineers/what-have-you?', coupled with seeking ideas for replacing people with automation (like internet check-in) wherever possible. Inevitably, some of these ideas and discussions will get leaked - and some will be dreamt up by inveterate Galley FM broadcasters.
The fact that you've heard something doesn't mean it's true, as you should remember from the strike period. Ideas for cutting costs are being talked about. Most won't get actioned, but some will. Which ones? We can't know that until the Company makes the appropriate announcements. All you can do, for now, is wait and see.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually digitalis you MAY be far from the truth...
Am based in New Zealand so not sure what UK laws apply, but the same laws did apply to the UK based FSM's.
The can make the job redundant. What can then happen is the role can be made available to the CSS, as a slightly different role, paying a remarkably different income.
We all know that they would be doing essentially exactly the same role, but in light of the position most major carriers find themselves in at the moment if they can get away with something like this, to reduce costs, they will.
They will not be doing away with an onboard manager role, they will simply transfer that role, rename it, and pay it substantially less. That is what has happened here in NZ.
Though the old managers, ISD's, were not getting anwhere near the $115k that korukid suggested.
Am based in New Zealand so not sure what UK laws apply, but the same laws did apply to the UK based FSM's.
The can make the job redundant. What can then happen is the role can be made available to the CSS, as a slightly different role, paying a remarkably different income.
We all know that they would be doing essentially exactly the same role, but in light of the position most major carriers find themselves in at the moment if they can get away with something like this, to reduce costs, they will.
They will not be doing away with an onboard manager role, they will simply transfer that role, rename it, and pay it substantially less. That is what has happened here in NZ.
Though the old managers, ISD's, were not getting anwhere near the $115k that korukid suggested.
