FlyBe - Shaft the CRJ fleet pilots again!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Bass rock, east side.
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlyBe - Shaft the CRJ fleet pilots again!
Finally after over 2 years of constant uncertainty the 4 CRJ200 aircraft purchased in 1999 in the strange deal with Bombardier will leave the FlyBe fleet for good.
The small team of dedicated pilots,trainers and technicians who put this aeroplane into service, achieved the first UK CAT111 HUD operations and maintained a first class safety record will be rewarded in the way only Exeter know how.
Those who have not allready fled to other opertors and do not hold a type rating for either Dash8 or Bae146 are to be re- trained, however they will be FORCED to sign yet another bonding arrangement and take out a huge personall loan with Barclays Bank simply to stay in employment.
Not for the first time BALPA seem unwilling or unable to help when some good legal advice for these guys is needed.
Question - is it right, is it legal that pilots should be re-bonded when foceably moved to another type/Fleet? Some sensible answers from UK proffessionals would be appreciated.
it's not as if FlyBe pay the going rate - they don't, £46k for new Capt and around £29 for the FO is rock bottom and Uncle Jim should start looking closer at what is going on in the Scotsmans office or the new competitive FlyBe will founder on the Jersey rocks!
The small team of dedicated pilots,trainers and technicians who put this aeroplane into service, achieved the first UK CAT111 HUD operations and maintained a first class safety record will be rewarded in the way only Exeter know how.
Those who have not allready fled to other opertors and do not hold a type rating for either Dash8 or Bae146 are to be re- trained, however they will be FORCED to sign yet another bonding arrangement and take out a huge personall loan with Barclays Bank simply to stay in employment.
Not for the first time BALPA seem unwilling or unable to help when some good legal advice for these guys is needed.
Question - is it right, is it legal that pilots should be re-bonded when foceably moved to another type/Fleet? Some sensible answers from UK proffessionals would be appreciated.
it's not as if FlyBe pay the going rate - they don't, £46k for new Capt and around £29 for the FO is rock bottom and Uncle Jim should start looking closer at what is going on in the Scotsmans office or the new competitive FlyBe will founder on the Jersey rocks!
Last edited by ALTSEL; 26th Apr 2003 at 15:23.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Blighty
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think that FlyBe can just re-bond you in order to accomadate their chop and changes within their fleet, I would definately seek some legal advise if I was you.
Good luck.
Good luck.
Rebonding after a forced type change within a company is a thorny issue BALPA will have to grasp firmly in the coming months. There is already a lot of chat amongst the pilots at Easyjet on the same topic. MYT is hanging on and as a result Easyjets pool of type rated Bus drivers is very small.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: england
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is this true for all of them? I heard of a few covert deals being struck with a 'chosen few' regards 146 ratings.
Airbrake, I really hope EZY aren't daft enough to be relying on the demise of MYT to crew their A319's.
Airbrake, I really hope EZY aren't daft enough to be relying on the demise of MYT to crew their A319's.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: A land beyond time
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nobody in their right minds would want to go from a CRJ to either a 146 or a Q400- the type ratings are virtually worthless in the UK in any case. The thought of having to pay for the privilege is horrifying.
The company needs to realise that it is their indecision, and their appalling planning in the first place, that led to this situation. If they want to retrain pilots, they should do so without bonds.
The only good (?!) part in this is, that should a pilot leave, the company they went to would almost certainly pay considerably more than flybe, making the bond easier to pay... small consolation I guess.
I agree with others, it is about time BALPA justified the large amounts of money we pay them, got of their chuffs and sorted this out!
The company needs to realise that it is their indecision, and their appalling planning in the first place, that led to this situation. If they want to retrain pilots, they should do so without bonds.
The only good (?!) part in this is, that should a pilot leave, the company they went to would almost certainly pay considerably more than flybe, making the bond easier to pay... small consolation I guess.
I agree with others, it is about time BALPA justified the large amounts of money we pay them, got of their chuffs and sorted this out!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAFAT - No this not the case, if it were that would maybe be OK.
A good example is a CRJ Captain of nearly 6 years service at JY,who incidently was not bonded on the CRJ originally, has been given but days to decide if he wants to stay with the airline.
By being committed to this evil bond he condems himself to another 3 years with this airline when he and many in a similar situation would be looking to move on to better things
Another strange fact is that French nationals working for FlyBe based in France are not bonded because French law forbids bonding.
It is high time BALPA did something for non BA pilots for a change and challanged this unscrupulous band of crooks in Exeter.
A good example is a CRJ Captain of nearly 6 years service at JY,who incidently was not bonded on the CRJ originally, has been given but days to decide if he wants to stay with the airline.
By being committed to this evil bond he condems himself to another 3 years with this airline when he and many in a similar situation would be looking to move on to better things
Another strange fact is that French nationals working for FlyBe based in France are not bonded because French law forbids bonding.
It is high time BALPA did something for non BA pilots for a change and challanged this unscrupulous band of crooks in Exeter.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Red Feather Club
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA I agree, but unfotunately flybe are not the only company who slump to these tactics.
Relatively poor industry standard wages and conditions not only means that these type of employers have some sort of mechanism in place to recoup even a few pounds and is one of the few ways they can hold onto staff for more than a year.
Its not legal(?) and its not right when you are being forced onto a new type and effectively do not have a choice, other than loose your job.
Unfortunately we pilots are our own worst enemies, as its all about supply and demand and what those morlalistic employers can get away with.
A company I worked for insisited we pay a new 3 year bond when the phased out their old fleet, regardless of time with company, as a result I had a continuos 51/2 yrs bond period from joining them.
In the end I simply got fed up with their disregard for their employees and the constant moving around the country at MY expense, paid up my remaining bond after 3 1/2 yrs service and 4 moves, got out and havent looked back.
Treat them like they treat you, and yes BALPA, or someone needs to address these situations as under European law they appear to be making you sign an illegal document.
This whole industry is a law unto itself and works on trust from its employees, why then cant the employers show the same levels of trust?
Rant over.........
Relatively poor industry standard wages and conditions not only means that these type of employers have some sort of mechanism in place to recoup even a few pounds and is one of the few ways they can hold onto staff for more than a year.
Its not legal(?) and its not right when you are being forced onto a new type and effectively do not have a choice, other than loose your job.
Unfortunately we pilots are our own worst enemies, as its all about supply and demand and what those morlalistic employers can get away with.
A company I worked for insisited we pay a new 3 year bond when the phased out their old fleet, regardless of time with company, as a result I had a continuos 51/2 yrs bond period from joining them.
In the end I simply got fed up with their disregard for their employees and the constant moving around the country at MY expense, paid up my remaining bond after 3 1/2 yrs service and 4 moves, got out and havent looked back.
Treat them like they treat you, and yes BALPA, or someone needs to address these situations as under European law they appear to be making you sign an illegal document.
This whole industry is a law unto itself and works on trust from its employees, why then cant the employers show the same levels of trust?
Rant over.........
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA - Thanks for detailing the situation, which is surprising. When the Company phased out the F27 and moved everyone across to the DHC8, there was no re-bonding.
When the CRJ was introduced, I myself was twice offered the opportunity to move onto it, but various factors, mainly the fact that I suspected it would not last very long in the fleet, led me to turn it down. I was concerned that it was too risky a move to make, and although I've sacrificed a couple of years jet salary, I'm happy that I did not take that risk. It would appear that the guys & gals that did are obviously paying for it now.
When the CRJ was introduced, I myself was twice offered the opportunity to move onto it, but various factors, mainly the fact that I suspected it would not last very long in the fleet, led me to turn it down. I was concerned that it was too risky a move to make, and although I've sacrificed a couple of years jet salary, I'm happy that I did not take that risk. It would appear that the guys & gals that did are obviously paying for it now.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys and Gals,
I sympathise. I was at JEA when they introduced the Escrow bond, first on the shed and then on the 146. I think that you could challenge this decision but who is going to court with all the necessary expenditure to fight it? The CRJ bonds will be cleared and a bright new shiny bond will be introduced in its place. You mention that when the F'r went the crews transferred to the D8 with no bond. Well to my mind that creates a precedent that it would be worth going to BALPA over.
I don't know what the current job situation is, if the option is there can you get out or is that what Uncle Jim is after you doing?
I sympathise. I was at JEA when they introduced the Escrow bond, first on the shed and then on the 146. I think that you could challenge this decision but who is going to court with all the necessary expenditure to fight it? The CRJ bonds will be cleared and a bright new shiny bond will be introduced in its place. You mention that when the F'r went the crews transferred to the D8 with no bond. Well to my mind that creates a precedent that it would be worth going to BALPA over.
I don't know what the current job situation is, if the option is there can you get out or is that what Uncle Jim is after you doing?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Embedded in a pocket of resistance
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to butt in, but I find this thread is totally amazing !
If an airline decides to alter the composition of it´s fleet then it´s their bl**dy problem !
This continuous bonding is like a loan shark Mob tactic of keeping everybody indebted knee deep, so that nobody breaks ranks. Truely amazing that BALPA does not step in.
BTW, another thing that amazes me is that this thread has not yet been moved to Terms and Endearment or Airlines, Airports & Routes.
Ah, of course, we´re talking about a UK airline here ! That explains a lot...
If an airline decides to alter the composition of it´s fleet then it´s their bl**dy problem !
This continuous bonding is like a loan shark Mob tactic of keeping everybody indebted knee deep, so that nobody breaks ranks. Truely amazing that BALPA does not step in. BTW, another thing that amazes me is that this thread has not yet been moved to Terms and Endearment or Airlines, Airports & Routes.
Ah, of course, we´re talking about a UK airline here ! That explains a lot...
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: England
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have any of you CRJ guys thought of Maersk?
They seem to be getting over their problems but have lost or are about to lose a number of guys.
Thay are a good company and have better terms than Flybe.
They seem to be getting over their problems but have lost or are about to lose a number of guys.
Thay are a good company and have better terms than Flybe.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: EXETER,UK
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everyone agrees that the whole subject of bound is a vexed issue. However, Is the company concerned really supposed to fork out £10000+ and valuable (irreplaceable) simulator/TRI time to keep ex-CRJ pilots gently employed whilst they look for another job at their leisure ?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Embedded in a pocket of resistance
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, Is the company concerned really supposed to fork out £10000+ and valuable (irreplaceable) simulator/TRI time to keep ex-CRJ pilots gently employed whilst they look for another job at their leisure ?
Aviation must be the only industry where the employee is held liable for the required ´on the job´ training !
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I left JEA in 1997 I resigned but needed more than the three months as my job offers improved as I neared my leaving date. From being in a situation in 1994 where I was gagging for a job and took the first thing on offer, SD360 at Blackpool, I ended up being in a situation where they offered me a rolling monthly contract as they couldn't get pilots on line to replace us as we were leaving too fast! My bond ended the month before I left as well, but I was just lucky!
Good luck to all concerned and may the boot soon be on the other foot!
Good luck to all concerned and may the boot soon be on the other foot!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Atention Jim French
WHY DO PEOPLE LEAVE YOUR AIRLINE???
Because to quote the operations director a few years ago to me-
" we would rather people leave after the bonding period than pay yearly increments and pension contributions"
what a great safety policy!
best wishes
WHY DO PEOPLE LEAVE YOUR AIRLINE???
Because to quote the operations director a few years ago to me-
" we would rather people leave after the bonding period than pay yearly increments and pension contributions"
what a great safety policy!
best wishes
Last edited by Aerial Anarchist; 28th Apr 2003 at 03:51.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Bass rock, east side.
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And another thing!
Think on all you cosy 146 drivers, maybe soon Uncle Jim may buy some 737's or even EMB170's and the Scotsman will be handing you lot the pen to sign on the dotted line!
Support your local CRJ fraternity or suffer later!!!!
Think on all you cosy 146 drivers, maybe soon Uncle Jim may buy some 737's or even EMB170's and the Scotsman will be handing you lot the pen to sign on the dotted line!
Support your local CRJ fraternity or suffer later!!!!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ALTSEL - You're right of course, plus I missed out on the salary increase that would have accompanied such a move, I just considered it a risk not worth taking. However, despite my decision to stick with the DHC8 fleet, apparently I too will suffer from the demise of the CRJ. This is because there are CRJ pilots far far far less senior to me who are about to move into positions that I've bid 1 & 2 for on the last 2 submissions, at a base where there has been no CRJ for almost 12 months now.
737 -
EMB 170/190 -
737 -
EMB 170/190 -
Last edited by RAFAT; 28th Apr 2003 at 09:52.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: A land beyond time
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
maxprop
If a company decides to replace a fleet, it is their problem- the cost of retraining the crews is simply part of the considerable financial outlay involved in that decision. It is, in fact, the cost of doing business and should never be passed on to crews. Even worse is the fact that when the a company acquires new aircraft, it invariably receives free conversions for the first set of crews- and yet the crews still get bonded for training that was essentially free to the company. I would be extremely surprised if the Q400 deal did not include training in this manner, as I am sure it did for the CRJ. And yet you want to re-bond the crews. Talk about morally bankrupt.
Most of the crews who will transfer to other types, and require retraining, do not want to do so. In most cases they have no choice, as the alternative is to leave and that is clearly not an option for all but the independently wealthy. So, naturally they will look around for something else- after all, you are handing them something they didn't sign up for. Your response is to chain them to the company with a bond.
This whole practice is despicable, and it is about time BALPA got into it.
It is also unsafe, as it causes enormous amounts of stress to the pilots who are affected by it.
For everbody else, the reason companies like flybe do this sort of thing, is because they can. Nobody challenges it, and the union is too weak-kneed to take a stand. Legal or not under Euro law, it will continue until action is taken.
BTW ALTSEL, exactly how can the 146 drivers support you? Plenty of us have been shafted by the company in a similar way to what is happening to you....
If a company decides to replace a fleet, it is their problem- the cost of retraining the crews is simply part of the considerable financial outlay involved in that decision. It is, in fact, the cost of doing business and should never be passed on to crews. Even worse is the fact that when the a company acquires new aircraft, it invariably receives free conversions for the first set of crews- and yet the crews still get bonded for training that was essentially free to the company. I would be extremely surprised if the Q400 deal did not include training in this manner, as I am sure it did for the CRJ. And yet you want to re-bond the crews. Talk about morally bankrupt.
Most of the crews who will transfer to other types, and require retraining, do not want to do so. In most cases they have no choice, as the alternative is to leave and that is clearly not an option for all but the independently wealthy. So, naturally they will look around for something else- after all, you are handing them something they didn't sign up for. Your response is to chain them to the company with a bond.
This whole practice is despicable, and it is about time BALPA got into it.
It is also unsafe, as it causes enormous amounts of stress to the pilots who are affected by it.
For everbody else, the reason companies like flybe do this sort of thing, is because they can. Nobody challenges it, and the union is too weak-kneed to take a stand. Legal or not under Euro law, it will continue until action is taken.
BTW ALTSEL, exactly how can the 146 drivers support you? Plenty of us have been shafted by the company in a similar way to what is happening to you....
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best thing to do is talk using your feet.
Every pilot that leaves has an opportunity to give views or reasons on why they are leaving during the exit day in Exeter.
Consider this, They expect to loose about 10% of flight deck every year,so at present thats in around 30.
In December02/January03 this figure was greater,therefore thats plenty of information on what the crews think.
So what do they do! **** all and still they leave.
Then a poor offer of a low% payrise(The first in at least 4 years).
Well I think you can decide how this token was accepted.
Lets see you carve your way out of this Woody Wood Pecker!
rdgs K.I.L.
Every pilot that leaves has an opportunity to give views or reasons on why they are leaving during the exit day in Exeter.
Consider this, They expect to loose about 10% of flight deck every year,so at present thats in around 30.
In December02/January03 this figure was greater,therefore thats plenty of information on what the crews think.
So what do they do! **** all and still they leave.
Then a poor offer of a low% payrise(The first in at least 4 years).
Well I think you can decide how this token was accepted.
Lets see you carve your way out of this Woody Wood Pecker!
rdgs K.I.L.