KLMuk trouble at mill!!
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Holland
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: le Wick du Chizz
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Holland
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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! "
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! "
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Holland
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi BB,
Too busy on writing stories rather than updating my profile I guess
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.
ATPL said it all in my days... :o
Looking at yours: what are you?
Too busy on writing stories rather than updating my profile I guess
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.
ATPL said it all in my days... :oLooking at yours: what are you?
Last edited by Dutchie; 24th Apr 2002 at 11:31.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
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?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: york
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: york
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: york
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: york
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Your Worst Nightmare
Age: 54
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: U.K.
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Last edited by Imhotep; 25th Apr 2002 at 18:49.