MYT - I can't believe it!!
 

MYT are reducing the pilot force using LIFO (last in first out).
In my opinion that's fair. However because of the sex discrimination act (1975) it doesn't totally apply to our female pilots, i.e. a similar percentage (within 5%) of both male and female pilots has to be laid-off, regardless of how many are employed of each sex.
Subsequently, demotions are also carried out using LIFO and not date of promotion. So a pilot that worked for the company previously in another department before becoming a pilot, but managed to keep the original date of joining, or a pilot which for whatever reason did not obtain his command until very late, can now keep his command against a far more senior captain. Is that fair?
Have you experienced this kind of events in your company?
:confused: :confused: :confused:

But what happens if you are due for redundancy under LIFO because you were a man when you joined, but have since undergone sex-change surgery and are legally registered as a woman...

Like me!

Hi VS. I think you should ask BALPA about this one. They are involved in the negotiations and I believe it's the way that they want it done......

763 jock

I know. I think that LIFO is a good idea, however how can it be fair for a very junior captain to keep his command, when other far more experienced and in some cases better commanders, even trainers potentially be demoted.
It's crazy in my eyes, but on the other hand I might be bias, because I might be directly affected.
Thank God I don't fall into the "better commanders/trainers category".
I wonder if I am being unreasonable.
:hmm:

Yeah, these things are always hard to deal with. I guess no matter how they do it, someone's got to go. Too bad. Thinking of you guys.

Been there done that. Hated it!

Likewise VS. When I joined at the bottom of the F/O's list, I always felt "vulnerable" should there ever be redunancies. Similarly when I went on the bottom of the Captains list, I felt that I would be the first guy put in the RHS if "demotions" were ever required. I bet a few BALPA subs will be cancelled in the near future! Apparently, with retirements/volunteers/change of working patterns etc the number has gone from 118 to about 77....Good luck to you.

Are you saying that BALPA want to go against the strict LIFO reverse seniority list ? So a female pilot who has been there for a shorter period than a male pilot may retain her job while a male pilot, with longer in the firm, gets hoofed out ??? ...... and BALPA want this ????

Tell me it aint so....please....

skibeagle,

The issue is not whether BALPA want it or not, it is directly related to Employment Law. I believe BALPA sought expert legal advice on the matter before the final solution was arrived at.

To Viscount Sussex and 763 jock I'm potentially at risk of redundancy as well (what a great statement). Wish you both all the best if the worst does happen. The job market isn't to bad at the minute so hopefully I shouldn't be state dependent! :uhoh:

Big Tudor

As you say, BALPA sought legal advice regarding the issue of sexual discrimination; however it would be discrimination against the male pilot if a lower service female was kept over the longer serving male pilot. I believe it's to do with actual compensation. It would be cheaper to compensate the male pilot than the female pilot so I was told by BALPA.
LIFO is great and fair for redundancies and it would be also fare if it meant LIFO based on date of promotion, but not on date of joining as it has been agreed between BALPA and the company.
I personally will be stopping my subscription from the union.
:mad:

Redundancies
 

How about this for a novel idea|?

From the total list of pilots decide how many Captains and First Officers the airlines needs to retain.

Have a look at their training records and sim rides in respect of ability and experience.

Keep the best, irrespective of length of service, and let the weakest ones go!

Ergo, the airline is slimmer, more cost effective and retains the best technical crews available.

Now THAT IS FAIR !! and gives the airline a great "once in a lifetime" to get rid of the borerlines fliers that only JUST manage to pass a check ride/sim ride......and anyone who has been/is a sim instructor will know there are plenty of them in the business!!

Hmmm. No-one as good as you, eh Ali?

The truth is that, if we are all really honest, the only good redundancy scheme is the one that leaves us in the job and kicks the other guy out first! Therein lies the problem - it is almost impossible to be just or fair in a manner that will seem 'right and good' to everyone. If you lose your job then you see it as a bad deal - and who can blame you?

LIFO is the only fair way to do it. Most pilots are incredibly selfish, sadly, and many think they are way better at their job than anyone else. Once you are into the realms of Mercenary Ali's thinking then you are faced with the difficulty of working out who is the 'better' pilot. There are almost countless permutations of ideas as to how you assess that - all designed to see that you stay in the company and the other guy goes! The other factor in favour of LIFO is that it is much easier for those removed to get jobs as there is no slur on their character or abilities. As we have seen from the comments so far, even the LIFO method is fraught with problems. The alternative is far worse - the company decides who stays and who goes. Old scores are settled, 'hunches' and 'gut-feelings' are acted on, 'big' personalities are kept on, quiet guys kicked out, anyone who dared to question anything at any point in the past is removed and so it goes on.

LIFO may be imperfect but if you leave it to the management to sort out then you will see what serious injustice is really all about.

Hey come on guys!
 

This has nothing to do with me! It does not matter how good or mediocre I am this is a reality check!

Are you really trying to tell me that there is no way of marking and/or judging who score highest at their sim rides and in their line checks or in their LOFT excercises?

I know we live in a "painless society" where every student has to have a degree however useless it may be, where nobody is allowed fo "fail" so everyone has GCSE's even if they are at Grade E, F and G which actually mean they FAILED!!

Now come on there are ways of the IRE/TRE/Check Airmen/sim instructors making reasoned judgements as to who is TOP and who is Median and who is only just a PASS !!

Anyway it was just and idea to kick around, it does not affect me personally cos I am staying where I am!! Ha Ha Ha....:ok:

:confused:
Norman Stanley Fletcher

I agree with you that whatever system or scheme you chose you will have unhappy people.
Also I agree that LIFO (using date of joining) is the fairest way of doing it when it comes to redundancies. Also in my opinion LIFO (using date of promotion) should be applied when demotions are being considered. In the case of MYT potentially some new captains (including those that have previously failed their command assessments) could remain as captains, were most of the trainers could be demoted, because of date of joining. Obviously it doesn’t go that far (yet) because of numbers.
Surely that cannot be a good or a fair way. And I am not trainer by a long way.
On the other hand if LIFO is being used, LIFO should mean LIFO, regardless of sex, race, religion, ethnic background, etc.
LIFO should also be used to demote trainers, but now we have politics of fleets (Boeing/Airbus). Who do you keep? The most senior Training Captain on the Boeing fleet or the newly promoted Training Captain on the Airbus fleet, since you are getting rid of the Boeing aircraft. Who do you demote? The senior Training Captain (male pilot) or the junior Training Captain (female pilot), since now you are contemplating the issue of sex discrimination.
:mad: :mad: :mad:

Or you could do it the way that MIke Street did it for BA when Dan Air were taken over. You ignore pilot's contracts for LIFO and decide to keep those pilots that you need who are flying the aircraft you are keeping on the day of the take-over.

And then you create a whirlwind of problems which take years and years to sort out - in the courts and elsewhere.

VS,

Im sorry to hear of your situation, I know exactly how you feel as I went through the same process with Virgin Atlantic following 9/11.

Not that it is of any use to you, BALPA managed to screw that up as well, LIFo did not really mean LIFO the demotion process was a complete :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:-up.

The only fair way to demote is LIFO to the LHS, the individuals are then put into a protected group & get their commands back in order as & when they re-appear.

I hope it all works out for MYT, why is it that we always suffer for teh incompetance of individuals who then walk away with a nice tasty pay-off?

You could encourage those pilots who are working past their Normal Retirement Date/Pensionable Retirement Date to retire. They are often on high increments, and they really ought to have better things to do with their time!

You could get rid of the most senior pilots by redundancy, giving them preferable terms, on the grounds that they are on the highest increments.

But most likely, you could simply do what the contract agreed by the union says you will do, and the union will always go for LIFO because the people doing the negotiations will generally be senior and have a vested interest.

Don't worry lads and lasses, my tongue is in my cheek - in broad terms, at least.

BALPA knockers in overdrive again I see!

What has happened here is that the pilots' representatives - elected by those pilots who are BALPA members - have taken the view that wrt redundancy, LIFO should apply (as would be considered sensible by just about every single airline pilot on the face of this planet btw).

When it comes to demotion, should it be based on doj as a pilot, doj as an employee, date of promotion, position on the seniority list, 'usefulness' - ie, should a trainer be exempt - being on the right type, etc etc. The list is endless and I suspect that every pilot will have their own view which will be different to everyone else's. Who would want to be a rep in this decision making time? Not me thanks.....

I think the general feeling is that the decisions have been taken by the CC WITHOUT consulting the membership. Throughout the whole "consultation" process within MYT, there has been VERY little feedback to the troops and the final options have certainly put a lot of noses out of joint.

What is the point in having two seniority lists (Capt and FO) when you just amalgamate them into one based on date of joining to decide who goes and who stays. OK, it's LIFO but it takes no account whatsoever of an individuals career progression within the company. There are now instances of people who have been in the company for a considerable period who have not been promoted to the LHS (for whatever reason.....) for several years but will now retain their Commands whilst, arguably, more dynamic individuals (quicker Commands) are demoted or worse made redundant.

So you have a scenario where someone who has had their Command for 6 months will keep it over someone who has had it for 3+ years purely because they have been in the company longer. Fair?

The whole thing is bl00dy mess....... there are only a very few who will not be affected by the fallout. I think BALPA will be receiving less in the way of subs in the not too distant future......

A4:(

:hmm:

A couple of questions.

1) What is the main purpose of Captains Seniority List?
2) Do you think it should be ignore?
3) What do you think is the fairest way of doing this?
You have 400 pilots but you only need 300 pilots.
How would you do it?
Please, only serious answers, thanks.

:confused: