Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Ryanair pilot strike

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Ryanair pilot strike

Old 3rd Nov 2018, 20:26
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 751
Originally Posted by flyingmed View Post
If Ryanair do have to keep the base open and end up losing money in EIN who will cover the cost? I doubt any loss would be made however some creative accountancy could show losses. If a company are losing money in a certain branch of the business the usual response is either restructuring and/or job cuts, how is it different here?
I don't think it is. The difference is that Ryanair was trying to use a clause in their contract that said you could be required to transfer and fired if you did not accept - that clause has been ruled unenforceable. Now they will have to go with redundancy procedures instead. Slightly more expensive for Ryanair, probably, same end result for crew, definitely.
infrequentflyer789 is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2018, 22:36
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: In a house
Posts: 92
It did seem strange that a foreign court could get involved in the micromanagement of a company be it Ryanair or any other company which may face a similar issue. Very bad position for the crew unfortunately. Hopefully it works out in the end for them!
flyingmed is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2018, 23:08
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by infrequentflyer789 View Post
Now they will have to go with redundancy procedures instead.
Which only becomes interesting if you have been employed for a longer period of time. Shorter contracts like in this case won't pay much.

And I wonder if the pilots are going to see something of the €250000 penalty. The ruling only stipulates that it is the penalty for a mandatory base change; not for a discharge and not for a voluntary change (it was underlined 4 times in the Ryanair letter!).
golfyankeesierra is online now  
Old 3rd Nov 2018, 23:17
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by flyingmed View Post
It did seem strange that a foreign court could get involved in the micromanagement of a company be it Ryanair or any other company which may face a similar issue.!
Not true, the court isn't getting involved in the management. As I read it (not a lawyer) the ruling doen't affect the validity of the base closure, nor the validity of termination of contracts. It only judges the validity of the clause for base change, which is not in accordance with dutch law.

(And I really hope that I will turn out to be wrong!)
golfyankeesierra is online now  
Old 4th Nov 2018, 05:08
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: malta
Posts: 107
Originally Posted by golfyankeesierra View Post
Which only becomes interesting if you have been employed for a longer period of time. Shorter contracts like in this case won't pay much.

And I wonder if the pilots are going to see something of the €250000 penalty. The ruling only stipulates that it is the penalty for a mandatory base change; not for a discharge and not for a voluntary change (it was underlined 4 times in the Ryanair letter!).
In Dutch law, when to be discharged, the employer would have to get permission from the social security office, making it plausible they discharge them because of economic reasons. They also have to present a decent plan to help those discharged get other jobs, keep them in the company, etc. This has to comply with Dutch law.

In this case, this seems difficult and if permission is not granted, ryanair has to go to court. The judges might not be favourable to ryanair, judging from the last courtcase and while they might make it possible for ryanair to discharge the pilots, they then have to pay a significant som, probably as much as that 250.000, but maybe more.
the_stranger is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2018, 08:53
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by the_stranger View Post
, they then have to pay a significant som,
It is usually around (nr of years in service) x (monthly gross salary), so a few months... not getting close to 250000..

(again, hope I will be proven wrong!)
golfyankeesierra is online now  
Old 4th Nov 2018, 13:25
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: In a house
Posts: 92
Originally Posted by the_stranger View Post
In Dutch law, when to be discharged, the employer would have to get permission from the social security office, making it plausible they discharge them because of economic reasons. They also have to present a decent plan to help those discharged get other jobs, keep them in the company, etc. This has to comply with Dutch law.
From what I've read the pilots are not being fired, they are being offered to change base and remain employed or leave the company. The internal memo which was attached to a previous post seems to show this is the move the company are taking. I worked a few years ago for a European wide company in the automotive industry which closed a branch in the UK and to avoid firing employees they offered to change department or leave. Nobody in that case was paid any form of compensation as it was seen as an attempt by the company to keep everyone employed. This looks awfully similar to that. Unfortunately it looks like all possible outcomes here are going to be very bad for the pilots involved.

Did Ryanair make any agreements with the Dutch pilot union like other countries? I have heard some unions around Europe have come to the negotiating table with long lists of demands on pay and benefits as apposed to laying the foundations for a viable long term strategy to stop base closures & undesired base changes etc. If this is the case that seems more like a strategy to cause problems for Ryanair with strikes etc rather than look out for the wellbeing of the crew they are supposed to be negotiating for.
flyingmed is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2018, 14:51
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,059
Did Ryanair make any agreements with the Dutch pilot union like other countries? I have heard some unions around Europe have come to the negotiating table with long lists of demands on pay and benefits as apposed to laying the foundations for a viable long term strategy to stop base closures & undesired base changes etc. If this is the case that seems more like a strategy to cause problems for Ryanair with strikes etc rather than look out for the wellbeing of the crew they are supposed to be negotiating for.
Yeah, let's get deprived of all our rights just to keep the base going and management richer. Unbeknown to you much of what unions are asking for is no primadonna treatment. How about things like summer holiday, sick payment entitlements, maternity/paternity leave, loss of license insurance. It's Ryanair throwing toys out of the cot saying those things are unreasonable demands. What do you think?
172_driver is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2018, 18:03
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: In a house
Posts: 92
Originally Posted by 172_driver View Post


Yeah, let's get deprived of all our rights just to keep the base going and management richer. Unbeknown to you much of what unions are asking for is no primadonna treatment. How about things like summer holiday, sick payment entitlements, maternity/paternity leave, loss of license insurance. It's Ryanair throwing toys out of the cot saying those things are unreasonable demands. What do you think?
Ryanair pilots are deprived of those things already. I was pointing to the fact that you need to build a solid foundation before you can build something. I work for a more 'reputable airline' and although we do have sick pay etc we do not have LOL insurance.

If the unions had taken the longer term goals into consideration why not demand local permanent contracts for crew first? That would then have immediately allowed access to basic benefits such as sick pay and maternity/paternity leave under local legislation (I'm sure in a country like Holland the local laws would stipulate very favorable benefits to the employees). Things like summer leave and loss of license insurance take a very long time to negotiate and can be dragged out for an even longer time by management, in the meantime at least you would have had your base covered by a local contract subject to local law and collective work agreement.

We all know the usual argument of ask for everything and hope to get as much as possible, but in reality the more you ask for the more of a hard line the company will take. Asking firstly for job security through local contracts may possibly have been quite an easy win, especially when FR were short on crew! Leave the big fight for summer leave, LOL, pensions etc. until the next argument where at least your job in a specific base is secure, at least then the threat of closing a base or firing staff is nullified by the previous agreement.
flyingmed is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 07:31
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 38
Originally Posted by flyingmed View Post
From what I've read the pilots are not being fired, they are being offered to change base and remain employed or leave the company. The internal memo which was attached to a previous post seems to show this is the move the company are taking. I worked a few years ago for a European wide company in the automotive industry which closed a branch in the UK and to avoid firing employees they offered to change department or leave. Nobody in that case was paid any form of compensation as it was seen as an attempt by the company to keep everyone employed. This looks awfully similar to that. Unfortunately it looks like all possible outcomes here are going to be very bad for the pilots involved.

Did Ryanair make any agreements with the Dutch pilot union like other countries? I have heard some unions around Europe have come to the negotiating table with long lists of demands on pay and benefits as apposed to laying the foundations for a viable long term strategy to stop base closures & undesired base changes etc. If this is the case that seems more like a strategy to cause problems for Ryanair with strikes etc rather than look out for the wellbeing of the crew they are supposed to be negotiating for.

In Dutch law, if you want to lay somebody off, you will have to prove it is because of 1 of 8 possible grounds.

The only ground that Ryanair can use in this case is the a-ground. For this, they have to prove that they are firing those employees due to economic reasons.

In the verdict on the first of November, the judge has already stated that the base closure is not a proven result of economic reason, but suspectibly done because of the strikes. He sees the closure as a misuse of power.
He has ruled the pilots will have to stay based in Eindhoven, get their salary, and maintain their currency.

So, if Ryanair decides to start a redundancy case to lay the pilots off, they will have to go to Dutch court again and prove the a-ground. Which, in the light of the 1 November verdict, is never going succeed.
SigWit is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 11:44
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: In a house
Posts: 92
Originally Posted by SigWit View Post
He has ruled the pilots will have to stay based in Eindhoven, get their salary, and maintain their currency.
Think we can nearly all agree the pilots and cabin crew in Ryanair should get much better contracts. I also think we can all agree Ryanair are the masters of the numbers game, there is always an exploit. I'll believe the situation only when the highest court in Holland rules in favour of keeping the base open.

Isn't it an economic case that they could earn more money elsewhere? I have no trust for that company, that is why im so pessimistic!
flyingmed is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 13:59
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 369
In Dutch law, if you want to lay somebody off, you will have to prove it is because of 1 of 8 possible grounds.
The only ground that Ryanair can use in this case is the a-ground. For this, they have to prove that they are firing those employees due to economic reasons.
Could you possibly list or link to the 8 grounds as I haven't been able to find them online? The use of the word "firing" is confusing the issue here even if you genuinely believe they are being fired ("dismissed")

He has ruled the pilots will have to stay based in Eindhoven, get their salary, and maintain their currency.
In researching more info on the NL laws it is necessary to find definitive rules that distinguish between "dismissal" of an employee and "redundancy" brought about by a company deciding to close its business.

This link is a summary of the redundancy payments situation in NL:

Redundancy payments in the Netherlands Netherlands Law Firm LVH Advocaten

On the face of it, it would be a ludicrous law that dictates that if an International company opens a branch in a NL town and then decides at some future point that it was not a good business decision to do so and wishes to close down it is obliged to comply with a law that says "the employees will have to stay based in the NL town and get their salary".

I couldn't find any law that states that and it is very hard to see how a higher court would agree with that decision.

During research I came across this Dutch case from earlier this year in which Ryanair's "dismissal" of an employee in Eindhoven was upheld in the courts. In this case Irish Law appears to have prevailed and the employee got no compensation.

https://www.lvh-advocaten.nl/en/the-...ons-is-upheld/
ayroplain is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 14:26
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 608
Nice try ayroplain, but you are wrong.

That case you are referring to, is about a Ryanair cabin attendant. The link you have there is of the law firm that Ryanair had hired in that case. They won the first lower court ruling in 2017. Then this happened in the summer 2018:

https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/in...eyword=Ryanair

(sorry in dutch, but trust me)

Ryanair was slaughtered in court, and had to pay her everything she had claimed.

Furthermore, in the ryanair Pilot ruling, this particular earlier court ruling concerning the cabin attendant was mentioned and used as a guideline/evidence of jurisprudence. So...
fox niner is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 14:47
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 38
Originally Posted by ayroplain View Post
Could you possibly list or link to the 8 grounds as I haven't been able to find them online? The use of the word "firing" is confusing the issue here even if you genuinely believe they are being fired ("dismissed")



In researching more info on the NL laws it is necessary to find definitive rules that distinguish between "dismissal" of an employee and "redundancy" brought about by a company deciding to close its business.

This link is a summary of the redundancy payments situation in NL:


On the face of it, it would be a ludicrous law that dictates that if an International company opens a branch in a NL town and then decides at some future point that it was not a good business decision to do so and wishes to close down it is obliged to comply with a law that says "the employees will have to stay based in the NL town and get their salary".

I couldn't find any law that states that and it is very hard to see how a higher court would agree with that decision.

During research I came across this Dutch case from earlier this year in which Ryanair's "dismissal" of an employee in Eindhoven was upheld in the courts. In this case Irish Law appears to have prevailed and the employee got no compensation.

Sorry, I am not allowed to post links yet as I don’t have a minimum of 10 posts. But you are looking for Art 7:669 lid 3 Burgerlijk Wetboek.

Thing is, you could probably lay people off or force them to move if you close a base for business reasons. But thing is, the judge has already ruled it a misuse of power by Ryanair and thus told them to keep paying them and keep them current, irregardless of the closure. So I wish Ryanair a lot of luck laying these pilots off...
SigWit is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 14:50
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by fox niner View Post
Nice try ayroplain, but you are wrong.

fox niner, I'm not trying anything just searching for facts. Very remiss of that Law Firm to have that case listed and not showing that it was subsequently overturned. How else is a body to know?

(sorry in dutch, but trust me)
LOL, I believe you

However, I still believe the decision is ludicrous from a business point of view and would be quite a deterrent to anyone thinking of starting up in NL.
ayroplain is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 15:06
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 369
Sorry, I am not allowed to post links yet as I don’t have a minimum of 10 posts. But you are looking for Art 7:669 lid 3 Burgerlijk Wetboek.


Thanks, SigWit,. I've had a look and translated (Google ) from Dutch.

I think there COULD be three possible grounds for Ryanair as follows:

a. the lapse of jobs as a result of the termination of the activities of the company or, for a future period of at least 26 weeks, necessarily lapse of workplaces as a result of the taking into account of business economics for efficient operations;

g. a disturbed employment relationship, such that the employer can not reasonably be required to continue the employment contract;

h. other than the aforementioned circumstances which are such that the employer can not reasonably be required to continue the employment contract

But, as you say, (a) stands out.

But thing is, the judge has already ruled it a misuse of power by Ryanair.
Well, all we can do now is wait and see.

ayroplain is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 15:27
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: malta
Posts: 107
Originally Posted by ayroplain View Post
However, I still believe the decision is ludicrous from a business point of view and would be quite a deterrent to anyone thinking of starting up in NL.
I certainly hope so, or that they at least think twice about how to run the company.
It really isn't that difficult, as long as you play nb the Dutch law. There are countless foreign companies in the Netherlands, but usually they are not as..... abrasive as ryanair.
the_stranger is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 15:29
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 608
However, I still believe the decision is ludicrous from a business point of view and would be quite a deterrent to anyone thinking of starting up in NL.
I understand what you mean, however, there are thousands of foreign companies who do business in NL. Several global companies have their (regional) headquarters here, specifically because of the open economy and good business opportunities, and the well established legal base for doing business, and reliable government structure.

Ryanair is simply trying to bypass a set of very sensible laws and regulations, which a normal company is very happy to abide by. Don’t like real rules? Then you are not worthy.
fox niner is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 15:33
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 38
Originally Posted by ayroplain View Post
Thanks, SigWit,. I've had a look and translated (Google ) from Dutch.

I think there COULD be three possible grounds for Ryanair as follows:

a. the lapse of jobs as a result of the termination of the activities of the company or, for a future period of at least 26 weeks, necessarily lapse of workplaces as a result of the taking into account of business economics for efficient operations;

g. a disturbed employment relationship, such that the employer can not reasonably be required to continue the employment contract;

h. other than the aforementioned circumstances which are such that the employer can not reasonably be required to continue the employment contract

But, as you say, (a) stands out.



Well, all we can do now is wait and see.

If you are interested, google “ECLI:NL:RBOBR:2018:5330” the find the ruling regarding the forced basechange following the strikes.

And indeed, it will be very interesting to see how this pans out. Ryanair always operates at the boundaries of the law, and outcomes are very difficult to predict.

The pilots have refused the voluntary transfer by the way, and told Ryanair that they are available for flight based out of Eindhoven, as per court ruling. Ryanair will likely soon start the redundancy process, and then we will know more.

SigWit is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2018, 18:55
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by SigWit View Post
If you are interested, google “ECLI:NL:RBOBR:2018:5330” the find the ruling regarding the forced base change following the strikes.

Thanks SigWit, that was some read (after translation ) and a lot to take in. Well worth it, though.

As people have said, it was, undoubtedly, as one-sided a judgment as I've possibly ever seen.

Trying to maintain a balance and bearing in mind that the strikes were, allegedly, the cause of the closure of the base, I couldn't find any mention of the judge requesting any details as to what the strikes were about. In my view this would have a considerable bearing in order to make a judgment on whether the pilots' demands were reasonable or not in the first place especially with future strikes promised if not conceded. Is that information in the public domain, i.e. the pilots' demands?

There was mention that one of the claimants was withdrawing his claim to which Ryanair agreed. It would be interesting to know why one decided to withdraw.
ayroplain is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.