Aer Lingus IAD-MAD
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: California
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yaletown,
If you have ever flown for an airline you should know its what you get paid per flight hour plus per diem and benefits. Aer Lingus is offering $21/fl. hr to start with and 6 step increases each with about a dollar an hour increase. In your seventh year you will be making $27/fl. hr. based upon 70 flight hours per month. NOT 85 hours. You should know that if you do 85 flight hours per month on a regional air carrier than you will NEVER be home. UP, Down, UP, Down all day long. With Aer Lingus you get about 15 block hours per pairing. 5 pairings a month and you are out of there. PLUS international per diem! And the benefits are terrific. This is the best offer I have seen. The Airline I worked for for 17 years went bankrupt. I was making about $40/fl. hour at the end. When ATA started they were a discount charter airlines. There wages ended up so high they couldn't compete as a discount airline. Sure I would like to make $40/hr again. But I realize that we live in a different economic climate and I for one think Aer Lingus is offering a good starting salary, with scheduled increases. Virgin America starts at $18/fl.hr and has NO scheduled wage increases and I can tell you they are having NO trouble finding people to work for that. Look at there route structure...... it keeps on growing and growing. And it isn't growing slowly, it is moving faster and faster. For what they are willing to pay their air crews they will eventually push United and American and Delta out of business. American airlines cannot compete against that kind of economics.
If you were against 'open skies' (the agreement between Europe and U.S.) you should have made your voice known before. Now it is to late and it's here and you can not hold back the sands of time. If Aer Lingus wasn't doing this other airlines would and eventually will. In fact you are going to see much more of this before its over. And if American airlines want to expand in Europe they will follow the same formula. If they choose not to grow then you will see the REAL discount airlines (Virgin America @ $18/fl. hr and others such as Jet blue and Ryan in Europe) move in and really eat your lunch.
Kama? Give me a break. What you are saying is that YOU don't like it, therefore it must be bad. It doesn't work like that. This is neither good nor bad, wrong nor right. It is just two things....... economics and survival. You can fight the future all you want but change is inevitable. Change is here and change is now.
If you have ever flown for an airline you should know its what you get paid per flight hour plus per diem and benefits. Aer Lingus is offering $21/fl. hr to start with and 6 step increases each with about a dollar an hour increase. In your seventh year you will be making $27/fl. hr. based upon 70 flight hours per month. NOT 85 hours. You should know that if you do 85 flight hours per month on a regional air carrier than you will NEVER be home. UP, Down, UP, Down all day long. With Aer Lingus you get about 15 block hours per pairing. 5 pairings a month and you are out of there. PLUS international per diem! And the benefits are terrific. This is the best offer I have seen. The Airline I worked for for 17 years went bankrupt. I was making about $40/fl. hour at the end. When ATA started they were a discount charter airlines. There wages ended up so high they couldn't compete as a discount airline. Sure I would like to make $40/hr again. But I realize that we live in a different economic climate and I for one think Aer Lingus is offering a good starting salary, with scheduled increases. Virgin America starts at $18/fl.hr and has NO scheduled wage increases and I can tell you they are having NO trouble finding people to work for that. Look at there route structure...... it keeps on growing and growing. And it isn't growing slowly, it is moving faster and faster. For what they are willing to pay their air crews they will eventually push United and American and Delta out of business. American airlines cannot compete against that kind of economics.
If you were against 'open skies' (the agreement between Europe and U.S.) you should have made your voice known before. Now it is to late and it's here and you can not hold back the sands of time. If Aer Lingus wasn't doing this other airlines would and eventually will. In fact you are going to see much more of this before its over. And if American airlines want to expand in Europe they will follow the same formula. If they choose not to grow then you will see the REAL discount airlines (Virgin America @ $18/fl. hr and others such as Jet blue and Ryan in Europe) move in and really eat your lunch.
Kama? Give me a break. What you are saying is that YOU don't like it, therefore it must be bad. It doesn't work like that. This is neither good nor bad, wrong nor right. It is just two things....... economics and survival. You can fight the future all you want but change is inevitable. Change is here and change is now.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: EU
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yaletown is from CANADA....why would he/she care about the USA/Ireland?
I am opposed to union busting, crossing picket lines etc. But I am not opposed to making money for UA and EI, trying new things and getting Americans off welfare, unemployment, food stamps and out of section 8 housing. American taxpayers pay for section 8, food stamps and welfare...the more people that get off government assisted programs the better the economy will be.
If the UA/EI venture lasts 6 months, at least there will be money for folks who need it. Personally I would not apply for this type of flying but I am not going to put down those who do.
In the long run it is about profits, getting the airlines out of financial trouble. There are no scabs here. Do I wish that UA was doing this flying with a 777, of course, they used to do it! Times are tough everywhere.
I am opposed to union busting, crossing picket lines etc. But I am not opposed to making money for UA and EI, trying new things and getting Americans off welfare, unemployment, food stamps and out of section 8 housing. American taxpayers pay for section 8, food stamps and welfare...the more people that get off government assisted programs the better the economy will be.
If the UA/EI venture lasts 6 months, at least there will be money for folks who need it. Personally I would not apply for this type of flying but I am not going to put down those who do.
In the long run it is about profits, getting the airlines out of financial trouble. There are no scabs here. Do I wish that UA was doing this flying with a 777, of course, they used to do it! Times are tough everywhere.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 756
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is an issue most close to my heart, being a career flight attendant (airlines must HATE that term!). The degeneration of flight attendant conditions is a worldwide phenomenon.
Yaletown does make some valid points, however I believe that the answer lies not with the the individual (karma - WTF?!), but the the corporate consciousness of the company concerned. It's finding the balance between corporate needs and what is best for the company's culture.
I work for Qantas Airways Short Haul division (although the company now refers to us as 'domestic' crew, yet we still operate limited international flights and will again operate more in the future). Qantas is run as a cutthroat business and the niceties, or what should happen (to which Yaletown elludes) does not come into it.
On given Short Haul flight, you can have crew working any one of eight(!) separate pay and conditions. Up to six of these contracts can be on any one flight! Three of these contracts are not even employed by a Qantas company and are casual labour. While I detest the use of external casual labour hire (especially to the degree to which Qantas has used it!) I cannot blame any labour hire employee or wish ill karma upon them!
Sadly this sort of thing is the way of the future for airlines to survive. It is getting harder for the legacies to make money and these airlines need to find ways to exploit laws and legislation. It does not make it right, per se, but it is not illegal. Rather than fight it (like Yaletown), one simply needs to accept the fact and help the push towards an equalisation between the diffferent contracts. That is where I believe karma comes in to play. I am on the second highest contract in terms of renumeration. My colleagues, on the highest contract, voted in a new contract that sees a particular allowance cut for anyone that started (or transfers to Short Haul division) after a particular date. Is this Qantas' fault? Or the fault of my colleagues who sought to protect their own interest by actively voting in a contract that saw others employed under what is, essentially, inferior conditions? This is not what is happening in this circumstance.
Whether you are an 18 (minimum age for cabin crew in Australia) year old wannabe who just desperately wants to realise the dream of becoming the flight attendant or someone with more experience (heykiddo) who can appreciate the airline's position and still wants to be employed under such a contract I believe it is their right pursue employment under these conditions. Are these inferior to the conditions offered by the legacy's 'mainline' crew? Yes! However it is the airline that is legally exploiting the situation. The candidates for these position are doing no wrong.
As mentioned I support the general view of Yaletown with respect to what the airlines are doing (lowering conditions by using separate companies and the 'churn and burn' mentality). And it saddens me that airlines have gone down this path. But to victimise individuals is short-sighted and narrow-minded, in my opinion.
This is where you lose me, Yaletown. What is patience and waiting going to achieve for heykiddo? Really. These conditions WILL exist with or not heykiddo takes up the position. Someone else will! Your words it a nerve with me. Your views make no sense in the world in which we live!
Congratulations heykiddo. I hope that you are successful in your application and wish you all the best!
Yaletown does make some valid points, however I believe that the answer lies not with the the individual (karma - WTF?!), but the the corporate consciousness of the company concerned. It's finding the balance between corporate needs and what is best for the company's culture.
I work for Qantas Airways Short Haul division (although the company now refers to us as 'domestic' crew, yet we still operate limited international flights and will again operate more in the future). Qantas is run as a cutthroat business and the niceties, or what should happen (to which Yaletown elludes) does not come into it.
On given Short Haul flight, you can have crew working any one of eight(!) separate pay and conditions. Up to six of these contracts can be on any one flight! Three of these contracts are not even employed by a Qantas company and are casual labour. While I detest the use of external casual labour hire (especially to the degree to which Qantas has used it!) I cannot blame any labour hire employee or wish ill karma upon them!
Sadly this sort of thing is the way of the future for airlines to survive. It is getting harder for the legacies to make money and these airlines need to find ways to exploit laws and legislation. It does not make it right, per se, but it is not illegal. Rather than fight it (like Yaletown), one simply needs to accept the fact and help the push towards an equalisation between the diffferent contracts. That is where I believe karma comes in to play. I am on the second highest contract in terms of renumeration. My colleagues, on the highest contract, voted in a new contract that sees a particular allowance cut for anyone that started (or transfers to Short Haul division) after a particular date. Is this Qantas' fault? Or the fault of my colleagues who sought to protect their own interest by actively voting in a contract that saw others employed under what is, essentially, inferior conditions? This is not what is happening in this circumstance.
Whether you are an 18 (minimum age for cabin crew in Australia) year old wannabe who just desperately wants to realise the dream of becoming the flight attendant or someone with more experience (heykiddo) who can appreciate the airline's position and still wants to be employed under such a contract I believe it is their right pursue employment under these conditions. Are these inferior to the conditions offered by the legacy's 'mainline' crew? Yes! However it is the airline that is legally exploiting the situation. The candidates for these position are doing no wrong.
As mentioned I support the general view of Yaletown with respect to what the airlines are doing (lowering conditions by using separate companies and the 'churn and burn' mentality). And it saddens me that airlines have gone down this path. But to victimise individuals is short-sighted and narrow-minded, in my opinion.
What is wrong with patience and waiting? A lot of us had to wait through the end of the 80's and almost into the mid 90's before the good airlines hired. Do you think we all went and worked for some crap fly by night airline? No we didn't because we had self respect, patience, and we waited for the best opportunity. We worked crap ground jobs for years until we got the right airline position. Don't be so bloody selfish.
Congratulations heykiddo. I hope that you are successful in your application and wish you all the best!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: North Carolina, US
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"After time walking through Dulles in that uniform will be a walk of shame for you, as many we be glaring. We can thank you for helping company's get rid of their current staff and outsource people like you. Thanks for helping ruin the Cabin Crew career!"
Ohhhh Bull Stuff!!!!!
Quit Whining. The Regionals and Commuter Airlines have ruined this industry for many years now. And what do you people do about it? Nothing!!!
I view Mesa, Colgan, ComAir and others with disdain as I see them in the terminal. Do they care. No. They continue to do their job for the low wages and work rules that they accepted.
I expect this EI deal to go through and be successful in reducing the airline career even further. And there is NOTHING that you or your unions will do about it.
So until you have a solution and are willing to stand up for yourselves on the current threat of career erosion, go talk tough to the wall.
Ohhhh Bull Stuff!!!!!
Quit Whining. The Regionals and Commuter Airlines have ruined this industry for many years now. And what do you people do about it? Nothing!!!
I view Mesa, Colgan, ComAir and others with disdain as I see them in the terminal. Do they care. No. They continue to do their job for the low wages and work rules that they accepted.
I expect this EI deal to go through and be successful in reducing the airline career even further. And there is NOTHING that you or your unions will do about it.
So until you have a solution and are willing to stand up for yourselves on the current threat of career erosion, go talk tough to the wall.
Last edited by IronWalt; 2nd Jan 2010 at 00:40.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: YVR
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you please keep your discussion professional IronWalt? Do not appreciate that last statement about me being 'a tough talking pansy'. Thank you. But I do appreciate you editing that statement. Cheers.
Oh and FYI, if ALPA cannot do anything about this, I suppose we can then say that pilots do not stand up for themselves? I doubt that. I do not agree with you. Regionals fly under scope clauses. They are not operating heavies and taking long haul routes from them, and in other countries than the US, regionals have actually been integrated back into the mainline operation, like for example SAS.
But the USA is a very unique place.
Oh and FYI, if ALPA cannot do anything about this, I suppose we can then say that pilots do not stand up for themselves? I doubt that. I do not agree with you. Regionals fly under scope clauses. They are not operating heavies and taking long haul routes from them, and in other countries than the US, regionals have actually been integrated back into the mainline operation, like for example SAS.
But the USA is a very unique place.
Last edited by yaletown; 2nd Jan 2010 at 00:48.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: California
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sorry to say I disagree with you. This whole situation is a direct result of the elimination of the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) during the Reagan administration. That was done to foster more competition in the airline industry and to open flying up to more people. Well now we have the competition and the airlines and the people that work there have to stay alive and to stay financially afloat. We have to deal with the new system so we cannot sit on our hands and hope that things will improve.
What yaletown wants us to do is to suffer so that we preserve his way of living and especially his salary. Eventually Virgin or some other airline will realize that they can price You out of the market and then you will see what it's like. The discount airlines are advancing and they will eventually destroy every American airline which cannot compete. Virgin airlines pay, for 70 flight hours a month, is about 15K per year with no scheduled increases in pay. How is United going to survive. Should United struggle to keep the salaries of their people? If they do they will die and all the jobs that they have will be lost. Which is the more honorable road to go down. Preserve the past at all costs and then to go down in flames or to yield to the winds of change and attempt to preserve jobs and keep families together.
Yaletown lives in the past and is willing to sacrifice us for himself. Bravo Yaletown.
What yaletown wants us to do is to suffer so that we preserve his way of living and especially his salary. Eventually Virgin or some other airline will realize that they can price You out of the market and then you will see what it's like. The discount airlines are advancing and they will eventually destroy every American airline which cannot compete. Virgin airlines pay, for 70 flight hours a month, is about 15K per year with no scheduled increases in pay. How is United going to survive. Should United struggle to keep the salaries of their people? If they do they will die and all the jobs that they have will be lost. Which is the more honorable road to go down. Preserve the past at all costs and then to go down in flames or to yield to the winds of change and attempt to preserve jobs and keep families together.
Yaletown lives in the past and is willing to sacrifice us for himself. Bravo Yaletown.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Dublin
Posts: 1,806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kiddo,
I hate to tell you this but although I am no longer employed my Aer Lingus I am far more aware of this "exercise" (which is how it is considered by many in Aer Lingus head office) then you could ever be.
It has also been whispered that the new CEO who joined the company just a few months ago is not exactly warming to this venture. Already a scary prospect for those like you wishing to apply for this role!
I appreciate you trying to remain upbeat about this but you must also see it for what it really is. It is not exactly in Aer Lingus best interests to make this venture work. As a stand alone entity so seperated from the main Aer Lingus operation yes of course it is important to remain profitable but in the grand scheme of things....It could turn into a massive white elephant! Just look at BA and its OpenSkies farce!
And USD17K is not exactly an amazing salary. I can assure you that those based in ROI are living a hell of a lot better off then you could! It is a pure example that there really are desperate people out there willing to work for peanuts when infact they are probably worth far more!!!!
I hate to tell you this but although I am no longer employed my Aer Lingus I am far more aware of this "exercise" (which is how it is considered by many in Aer Lingus head office) then you could ever be.
It has also been whispered that the new CEO who joined the company just a few months ago is not exactly warming to this venture. Already a scary prospect for those like you wishing to apply for this role!
I appreciate you trying to remain upbeat about this but you must also see it for what it really is. It is not exactly in Aer Lingus best interests to make this venture work. As a stand alone entity so seperated from the main Aer Lingus operation yes of course it is important to remain profitable but in the grand scheme of things....It could turn into a massive white elephant! Just look at BA and its OpenSkies farce!
And USD17K is not exactly an amazing salary. I can assure you that those based in ROI are living a hell of a lot better off then you could! It is a pure example that there really are desperate people out there willing to work for peanuts when infact they are probably worth far more!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: California
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been out of work since my former unionized airline went bankrupt. I receive emails from my union, the AFA, all the time. I found this job because of them. They even told us where to apply. It is ironic that the union directed me to this job. This job does not take any work away form other UNION people. Heck, I AM THE UNION. This whole discussion is ludicrous. This is a new route. No Union members in Ireland or in the US are going to lose their job because of us. Aer Lingus and United are simply trying to take advantage of the change in rules due to 'open skies'. This is simply smart business. You either change and adapt or be eaten by your competition. Both United and Aer Lingus have had financial problems. You do not resolve those problems by just sitting on your hands. You have to act. Taking action is always a risk but burying your head in the sand is sure death.
As far as the pay is concerned it is always amazing to me that those who are negative always refer to the lowest figure that you could make. By my calculations a first year F/A with Aer Lingus will make between 23-25K a year. By the fifth year we will be at 30K a year. Sure I would like to earn more but I would rather fly half a month doing long hauls for 30K than riding up and down all month long at some regional airline. You seem to forget that this pay is based up 70 fl hrs a month. If you fly more, which is easy to to in long haul flying, you can make a lot more.
Neither you or Yaletown are even addressing the real threat to your jobs. It is Virgin America. Virgin F/A's make (based on 70 fl. hrs a month) About $15K a year with less per diem than Aer Lingus offers. As I have said before, Virgin, Jet Blue and Ryanair are the real threats and they will eat your lunch. Air Lingus is offering the best pay that I have seen so far for the type of flying I want to do. No one is asking you to like it. It really doesn't matter what you think because the world has changed and this is the new reality. Unless the American government starts the CAB again competition is here and it is going to get a lot worse. If you really feel so strongly about this write your congressman or the two of you can picket up and down Pennsylvania Avenue. Do something positive to support your beliefs instead of being so negative. It won't help, but at least you will have followed your convictions instead of trying to get someone who wants this job to throw themselves under the bus to preserve your way of life. Of course that won't help either because there are 50 more behind me and 100 more behind them. A lot of my friends from the airlines are still out of work after nearly two years and the local hardware store pays a lot less than Aer Lingus. There are not a lot of jobs around the allow you to work for half a month for 24K the first year. I consider myself one of the lucky ones. Many of my friends from the airlines have run through unemployment and have no job prospects. Aer Lingus looks pretty good if the alternative is flipping burgers. But you two, who are extremely lucky that you still have good paying jobs, are so smug and self righteous that you are willing to sacrifice other people to justify your own needs. It should be of no concern to you if I take this job or not unless of course you have ulterior motifs. And of course you do. You want to maintain the status quo because its in your financial interests. You are walking around with blinders on. The status quo is already gone. It got blown away under the Reagan administration and it is gone forever. No one is listening to you two anymore. You have become antiquated and in the process you have become irrelevant.
As far as the pay is concerned it is always amazing to me that those who are negative always refer to the lowest figure that you could make. By my calculations a first year F/A with Aer Lingus will make between 23-25K a year. By the fifth year we will be at 30K a year. Sure I would like to earn more but I would rather fly half a month doing long hauls for 30K than riding up and down all month long at some regional airline. You seem to forget that this pay is based up 70 fl hrs a month. If you fly more, which is easy to to in long haul flying, you can make a lot more.
Neither you or Yaletown are even addressing the real threat to your jobs. It is Virgin America. Virgin F/A's make (based on 70 fl. hrs a month) About $15K a year with less per diem than Aer Lingus offers. As I have said before, Virgin, Jet Blue and Ryanair are the real threats and they will eat your lunch. Air Lingus is offering the best pay that I have seen so far for the type of flying I want to do. No one is asking you to like it. It really doesn't matter what you think because the world has changed and this is the new reality. Unless the American government starts the CAB again competition is here and it is going to get a lot worse. If you really feel so strongly about this write your congressman or the two of you can picket up and down Pennsylvania Avenue. Do something positive to support your beliefs instead of being so negative. It won't help, but at least you will have followed your convictions instead of trying to get someone who wants this job to throw themselves under the bus to preserve your way of life. Of course that won't help either because there are 50 more behind me and 100 more behind them. A lot of my friends from the airlines are still out of work after nearly two years and the local hardware store pays a lot less than Aer Lingus. There are not a lot of jobs around the allow you to work for half a month for 24K the first year. I consider myself one of the lucky ones. Many of my friends from the airlines have run through unemployment and have no job prospects. Aer Lingus looks pretty good if the alternative is flipping burgers. But you two, who are extremely lucky that you still have good paying jobs, are so smug and self righteous that you are willing to sacrifice other people to justify your own needs. It should be of no concern to you if I take this job or not unless of course you have ulterior motifs. And of course you do. You want to maintain the status quo because its in your financial interests. You are walking around with blinders on. The status quo is already gone. It got blown away under the Reagan administration and it is gone forever. No one is listening to you two anymore. You have become antiquated and in the process you have become irrelevant.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: California
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
apaddyinuk
The civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) controlled what an airline could charge for a flight. As such airline wages began to rise to extremely high levels in the late 70's. Reagan disbanded the CAB and opened American skies to competition. Airlines began to set there own prices and the skies opened to all kinds of discount airlines. What is happening today is directly related to the elimination of the CAB and the condition of US airlines is a direct result of that single act.
You don't know the future, and the last time I checked no one does. You think that I must be naive simply because I don't agree with you. After all you KNOW better. You are a EUROPEAN. You USED to work for Aer Lingus. You act like you are the font of knowledge coming down from on high to impart your wisdom to the poor unknowing masses of the world. Maybe you will be right about what will happen on the other hand maybe you will be wrong. You might think about having a little humility. No one knows the future.......... not even you.
The civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) controlled what an airline could charge for a flight. As such airline wages began to rise to extremely high levels in the late 70's. Reagan disbanded the CAB and opened American skies to competition. Airlines began to set there own prices and the skies opened to all kinds of discount airlines. What is happening today is directly related to the elimination of the CAB and the condition of US airlines is a direct result of that single act.
You don't know the future, and the last time I checked no one does. You think that I must be naive simply because I don't agree with you. After all you KNOW better. You are a EUROPEAN. You USED to work for Aer Lingus. You act like you are the font of knowledge coming down from on high to impart your wisdom to the poor unknowing masses of the world. Maybe you will be right about what will happen on the other hand maybe you will be wrong. You might think about having a little humility. No one knows the future.......... not even you.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: YVR
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heykiddo, I am not trying to make this personal at all, but will tell you, I have had to start over in the recent past having flown for an airline that went bankrupt within the last 5 years. You are making assumptions about people you know little of. I am not on a cushy wage at all, but I am willing to fight against outsourcing workers to ensure that this job remains a career.
As it stands, it is becoming contract work, much like seasonal charter flying. If Aer Lingus were keeping its Irish workers and all was remaining the same, and this was supplementary and always separate, I would be all for it. Unfortunately, it is not, and you are knowingly taking work away from these people. We all want growth for our companies so we as workers (and you do realize sir that the Aer Lingus crews have taken big cuts and make less than a senior flight attendant in the States) can share in the company's success; how would you feel if you had sacraficed for your company, held out, were on a crap wage, and then they went ahead and hired a bunch of overseas workers, and you were getting laid off? Those are the times and we should all just accept that? Do you personally know any Aer Lingus cabin crew? Apaddyinuk I am assuming does, and I do. You need to get the facts from those that are getting buggerred. So when Aer Lingus lays you off, and they tell you it is because you Americans are just getting too expensive and not giving them what they want, you will just say, 'oh that is ok. this is the airline industry now. I need to accept that if I want to do this, I must accept zero job security and give them concessions whenever they ask.' ? As much as I hate this expression, 'it takes two to tango', meaning, the company is knowingly manipulating people into this deal, but the applicants are also agreeing to it. But alas, sometimes we cannot see the forest for the trees.
If you are looking for the general airline world to endorse what you are doing, forget about it as it will never happen. I read the American blogs too, and the flight attendants there, from all airlines are calling this a scab operation and are very clear about their resentment to it. The odds are not in favour of you people. I agree with apaddyhunk as well that this is short lived. Look at the protectionist movement that is going on in Washington right now. I am sure ALPA's lobbyists are talking to the right people and their connections on Capital Hill as we speak. ALPA gets a lot of what they want.
Oh, (and I will not support this at all), but Canada is currently entering into complete open skies with Europe. In Canada, the dollar is less and companies do not have to pay for health insurance. Not to mention, many of us are bilingual and multilingual. It would not be hard to have a flight that originated in YYZ, stopped in a US city (JFK) pick up the American lot then fly on to DUB for example. How are you going to feel when these same companies who are wooing you now, suddenly dump you for us up North where they can save even more money? What goes around comes around. Better to stop it now than let it get out of hand.
As it stands, it is becoming contract work, much like seasonal charter flying. If Aer Lingus were keeping its Irish workers and all was remaining the same, and this was supplementary and always separate, I would be all for it. Unfortunately, it is not, and you are knowingly taking work away from these people. We all want growth for our companies so we as workers (and you do realize sir that the Aer Lingus crews have taken big cuts and make less than a senior flight attendant in the States) can share in the company's success; how would you feel if you had sacraficed for your company, held out, were on a crap wage, and then they went ahead and hired a bunch of overseas workers, and you were getting laid off? Those are the times and we should all just accept that? Do you personally know any Aer Lingus cabin crew? Apaddyinuk I am assuming does, and I do. You need to get the facts from those that are getting buggerred. So when Aer Lingus lays you off, and they tell you it is because you Americans are just getting too expensive and not giving them what they want, you will just say, 'oh that is ok. this is the airline industry now. I need to accept that if I want to do this, I must accept zero job security and give them concessions whenever they ask.' ? As much as I hate this expression, 'it takes two to tango', meaning, the company is knowingly manipulating people into this deal, but the applicants are also agreeing to it. But alas, sometimes we cannot see the forest for the trees.
If you are looking for the general airline world to endorse what you are doing, forget about it as it will never happen. I read the American blogs too, and the flight attendants there, from all airlines are calling this a scab operation and are very clear about their resentment to it. The odds are not in favour of you people. I agree with apaddyhunk as well that this is short lived. Look at the protectionist movement that is going on in Washington right now. I am sure ALPA's lobbyists are talking to the right people and their connections on Capital Hill as we speak. ALPA gets a lot of what they want.
Oh, (and I will not support this at all), but Canada is currently entering into complete open skies with Europe. In Canada, the dollar is less and companies do not have to pay for health insurance. Not to mention, many of us are bilingual and multilingual. It would not be hard to have a flight that originated in YYZ, stopped in a US city (JFK) pick up the American lot then fly on to DUB for example. How are you going to feel when these same companies who are wooing you now, suddenly dump you for us up North where they can save even more money? What goes around comes around. Better to stop it now than let it get out of hand.
Last edited by yaletown; 2nd Jan 2010 at 20:16.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: EU
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not a "cross the picket line" operation, there is no picket line. EI would have to hire flight attendants in MAD if they did not hire in IAD. They would have to change their entire schedule to use a wide body from DUB-MAD-IAD-MAD-DUB for a 5 or 6 day trip if they used their current flight attendants.
I do not like what is happening but for me it is just life, and part of what the airlines feel they need to do to keep out of bankruptcy.
Personally I would not apply for this but others are certainly entitled to do what they wish as far as employment.
At this point it is probably a 'wait and see" as to what happens....
Also, ALPA is not doing anything about this.... they are not happy but there is nothing happening in DC on this issue.
I do not like what is happening but for me it is just life, and part of what the airlines feel they need to do to keep out of bankruptcy.
Personally I would not apply for this but others are certainly entitled to do what they wish as far as employment.
At this point it is probably a 'wait and see" as to what happens....
Also, ALPA is not doing anything about this.... they are not happy but there is nothing happening in DC on this issue.
Last edited by IFLy4Free; 2nd Jan 2010 at 23:34. Reason: addition to information
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: YVR
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
European crews do up to 16 day trips on long haul, that is why they are allowed to have suit cases. Doing a 6 day trip would be nothing for them.
Talk to your fellow Americans then as they are the ones calling it that. Without getting into semantics, does it really matter? If the masses perceive it as that, one who is doing the work will be treated like a scab anyways. Apathy is no excuse; you cannot look back and whinge that things are bad for you when you sat back and did not fight when the changes were taking place. The reason why things are such a mess right now is because people sat back, said 'that is life' and let very shrewd companies lobby hard to get rid of regulation, because they knew the general public would be apathetic.
Talk to your fellow Americans then as they are the ones calling it that. Without getting into semantics, does it really matter? If the masses perceive it as that, one who is doing the work will be treated like a scab anyways. Apathy is no excuse; you cannot look back and whinge that things are bad for you when you sat back and did not fight when the changes were taking place. The reason why things are such a mess right now is because people sat back, said 'that is life' and let very shrewd companies lobby hard to get rid of regulation, because they knew the general public would be apathetic.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just so you know...
'Scab" is not an acceptable word in here, or indeed, anywhere. Suggest that you all find more intelligent ways to make your point. No further warnings, and please note, this is not a matter for debate - so don't.
'Scab" is not an acceptable word in here, or indeed, anywhere. Suggest that you all find more intelligent ways to make your point. No further warnings, and please note, this is not a matter for debate - so don't.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UIP : 4° 10’ 0” W, 47° 58’ 0” N
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heykiddo
HeyKiddo. I'm afraid to say that you are wrong when you say that you are not taking jobs from any union members in the Republic of Ireland. EI have had a long haul based crew in SNN for 16 years and their last longhaul aircraft is now going to IAD to give people outside the ROI a job.
I'm not getting into the whole reasons as to why who or how but that is in fact that ACTUAL FACTS. 120 people have been told they have no jobs in March in SNN. and another 160+ crew in both ORK AND DUB and yet both longhaul and shorthaul fleets are continuing to increase but not to the benefit of the home base crews.
I'm not getting into the whole reasons as to why who or how but that is in fact that ACTUAL FACTS. 120 people have been told they have no jobs in March in SNN. and another 160+ crew in both ORK AND DUB and yet both longhaul and shorthaul fleets are continuing to increase but not to the benefit of the home base crews.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Dublin
Posts: 1,806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heykiddo....
I suggest you take all that is being said in and think about it. You are qiuck to go on the defensive but you are not quick to actually stop and think "is this going to work"! You are right, no one can foretell the future but people can see the warning signs everywhere!
I suggest you take all that is being said in and think about it. You are qiuck to go on the defensive but you are not quick to actually stop and think "is this going to work"! You are right, no one can foretell the future but people can see the warning signs everywhere!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: California
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrong.
IAD is getting a new A330 A/C. Sorry about that but facts are facts.
As I said I am Union too. The Union (AFA) turned me on to this job and told me where to apply. Sorry about that why don't you take it up with the Union. No union people will lose a job because this is a new route. Sorry again but facts are facts. Interestingly enough this venture may well quash Ryanair from taking control of Aer Lingus. You realize that Aer Lingus expects Ryanair to make another run for Aer Lingus as early as later this month. If United and Aer Lingus get legally tied up that could thwart Ryanair form pursuing Aer Lingus. What do you think will happen to the union jobs if Ryanair gets ahold of Aer Lingus. I can tell you that your standard of living won't go up. This venture may turn out to be a blessing for Aer Lingus. Either way I am going to fly ............ so sorry. Smile!
IAD is getting a new A330 A/C. Sorry about that but facts are facts.
As I said I am Union too. The Union (AFA) turned me on to this job and told me where to apply. Sorry about that why don't you take it up with the Union. No union people will lose a job because this is a new route. Sorry again but facts are facts. Interestingly enough this venture may well quash Ryanair from taking control of Aer Lingus. You realize that Aer Lingus expects Ryanair to make another run for Aer Lingus as early as later this month. If United and Aer Lingus get legally tied up that could thwart Ryanair form pursuing Aer Lingus. What do you think will happen to the union jobs if Ryanair gets ahold of Aer Lingus. I can tell you that your standard of living won't go up. This venture may turn out to be a blessing for Aer Lingus. Either way I am going to fly ............ so sorry. Smile!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a point of clarification on EI's A330s. The A330 for this JV will not be new. Aer Lingus has 3 A330-200s (the type to be used on this route), all built between 1999 and 2007. Two are on the ground at DUB right now, including the one that will be used for this route. The next new A330 Aer Lingus is due to receive will be a -300 in April 2010.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: YVR
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is an interesting article to read regarding this new arrangement:
What are Scope Clauses and Why Are People Fighting Over Them?
By Brett Snyder Nov. 23rd 2009
"In January 2010, nearly every single one of United Airlines’ (UAUA) labor contracts officially becomes amendable. The rhetoric from both sides is bound to ramp up as we get closer, and you’re going to hear a lot about scope clauses, particularly during the pilot negotiations. Why? And what is a scope clause anyway?
First, for you non-airline folks, I should explain the “amendable” piece. Normal labor law doesn’t apply to the airline industry. Instead, airlines are governed by the Railway Labor Act. Under this act, contracts don’t expire but rather become amendable. This is to help prevent work stoppages in an industry that is considered vital to the nation. But once it becomes amendable, the negotiations really heat up on a new contract, and it can take ages to resolve.
Usually, you hear about pay as being the hot button issue, but this time around at United and elsewhere in the industry, the pilots are really focusing on scope. So what is scope?
A scope clause is what defines what type of flying can be done by pilots that aren’t employed by the airline. Historically, this has been primarily used to limit the scope of flying that the regional carriers can do under the mainline’s brand name.
Ever wonder why American Eagle (AMR) has so few 70 seaters buzzing around? And why Continental Express has no jets larger than 50 seats? It’s all because of the scope clause. The scope clause can not only limit the number of seats but it can also limit the total number of airframes flown by others. In some cases, there is a ratio set up so that the number of express airplanes can grow as long as the number of mainline planes grow as well.
At United, the situation is particularly acute since the airline has been rapidly expanding regional flying. For example, in October, mainline flying was down 6.8 percent while regional flying was up 14.7 percent. United recently finished retiring 100 mainline planes without a replacement planned. And just to put a cherry on top of this thing, they announced earlier this year a new partnership with Aer Lingus.
So why is that a big deal? Well, the plan is for United to market the flights as its own but Aer Lingus will do the flying. Sounds like a codeshare, right? Wrong. These will be airplanes that Aer Lingus pulls out of their own system to fly from a United hub (Washington/Dulles) to a third city (Madrid). They will staff the airline with US-based, non-union workers in order to keep costs low. This is effectively United bringing the regional model to long haul, widebody flying. So United pilots are being squeezed from both ends.
Naturally, United’s employees are scared about this. They can fight for all the pay raises they want, but it doesn’t help if all the flying is done by someone else. So you will see scope clauses coming front and center in the near future as these and other negotiations begin to really heat up."
Tags: Aer Lingus, Clause, United Airlines, Scope Clause, Free Trade, Strategy, Finance, Management, Brett Snyder
In addition to writing BNET's travel industry blog, Brett Snyder also pens the award-winning consumer travel blog, Cranky Flier. You can follow him on ******* under the name crankyflier.
Quoted from BNET.com
What are Scope Clauses and Why Are People Fighting Over Them?
By Brett Snyder Nov. 23rd 2009
"In January 2010, nearly every single one of United Airlines’ (UAUA) labor contracts officially becomes amendable. The rhetoric from both sides is bound to ramp up as we get closer, and you’re going to hear a lot about scope clauses, particularly during the pilot negotiations. Why? And what is a scope clause anyway?
First, for you non-airline folks, I should explain the “amendable” piece. Normal labor law doesn’t apply to the airline industry. Instead, airlines are governed by the Railway Labor Act. Under this act, contracts don’t expire but rather become amendable. This is to help prevent work stoppages in an industry that is considered vital to the nation. But once it becomes amendable, the negotiations really heat up on a new contract, and it can take ages to resolve.
Usually, you hear about pay as being the hot button issue, but this time around at United and elsewhere in the industry, the pilots are really focusing on scope. So what is scope?
A scope clause is what defines what type of flying can be done by pilots that aren’t employed by the airline. Historically, this has been primarily used to limit the scope of flying that the regional carriers can do under the mainline’s brand name.
Ever wonder why American Eagle (AMR) has so few 70 seaters buzzing around? And why Continental Express has no jets larger than 50 seats? It’s all because of the scope clause. The scope clause can not only limit the number of seats but it can also limit the total number of airframes flown by others. In some cases, there is a ratio set up so that the number of express airplanes can grow as long as the number of mainline planes grow as well.
At United, the situation is particularly acute since the airline has been rapidly expanding regional flying. For example, in October, mainline flying was down 6.8 percent while regional flying was up 14.7 percent. United recently finished retiring 100 mainline planes without a replacement planned. And just to put a cherry on top of this thing, they announced earlier this year a new partnership with Aer Lingus.
So why is that a big deal? Well, the plan is for United to market the flights as its own but Aer Lingus will do the flying. Sounds like a codeshare, right? Wrong. These will be airplanes that Aer Lingus pulls out of their own system to fly from a United hub (Washington/Dulles) to a third city (Madrid). They will staff the airline with US-based, non-union workers in order to keep costs low. This is effectively United bringing the regional model to long haul, widebody flying. So United pilots are being squeezed from both ends.
Naturally, United’s employees are scared about this. They can fight for all the pay raises they want, but it doesn’t help if all the flying is done by someone else. So you will see scope clauses coming front and center in the near future as these and other negotiations begin to really heat up."
Tags: Aer Lingus, Clause, United Airlines, Scope Clause, Free Trade, Strategy, Finance, Management, Brett Snyder
In addition to writing BNET's travel industry blog, Brett Snyder also pens the award-winning consumer travel blog, Cranky Flier. You can follow him on ******* under the name crankyflier.
Quoted from BNET.com
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like it is formalized and may even expand, as per a release from Aer Lingus Investor Relations (I believe the code share calls for up to 3 A330s):
United Airlines Code Share Agreement
Dublin, 07 January 2010: Aer Lingus Group plc (“Aer Lingus”) today formalized its codeshare agreement with United Airlines to jointly operate scheduled service between Washington Dulles and Madrid, Spain. The service will launch March 28th and it is anticipated that additional routes may be made available for sale during 2010 to commence operation in Summer 2011.
Both carriers will equally share the commercial and operational benefits and risk, with Aer Lingus managing the operational aspects of the new partnership services and United Airlines taking responsibility for managing revenue generation. The Partnership route structure will be sold under both Aer Lingus and United Airlines codes and will leverage both parties’ network
capabilities.
United Airlines Code Share Agreement
Dublin, 07 January 2010: Aer Lingus Group plc (“Aer Lingus”) today formalized its codeshare agreement with United Airlines to jointly operate scheduled service between Washington Dulles and Madrid, Spain. The service will launch March 28th and it is anticipated that additional routes may be made available for sale during 2010 to commence operation in Summer 2011.
Both carriers will equally share the commercial and operational benefits and risk, with Aer Lingus managing the operational aspects of the new partnership services and United Airlines taking responsibility for managing revenue generation. The Partnership route structure will be sold under both Aer Lingus and United Airlines codes and will leverage both parties’ network
capabilities.