Decline of Terms and Conditions Industrywide
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a figment of my imagination
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Decline of Terms and Conditions Industrywide
Forgive me for flogging this old horse to death, but I have never been quite satisfied with the answers over the years.
Reading posts about how every airline is cutting back on t's and c's, hearing how poor new contracts are, and knowing how much my own employer is trying to reduce our agreements despite record profits, I wonder how, as a community, we have allowed this to happen.
15 years ago, a CEO of an airline said that if a monkey turned up on his doorstep with a CPL, he would put him/her in the R/H seat of a jet, and pay them 30k p.a. No doubt with a Final Salary pension, LoL, Private health, share options, etc.
Now the monkey's brother/sister turns up on the doorstep with a ATPL and TYPE RATING and still gets 30k p.a. AND nothing else. I don't believe that employment opportunities now are that much different from then. We seemed to have allowed, industrywide, the decision-makers to get away with it. If I was them I would too.
I suppose what I am trying to say is that we all must bear responsibility for allowing this to happen. Maybe it came about during the time in the mid 90's when things were tight and concessions were made to help an airline's survival. But now, with just about every airline posting good, healthy profits, are our t's and c's being allowed to still be eroded. Call me a Communist, but I thought we should all benefit from our employers' success.
The questions that I want to ask to my fellow pilots is; are we all now pi55ed off enough now to actually do something about it? If we are, what? and, judging by the level of dissatisfaction, is BALPA the right medium to do it through?
I put these questions to the house!
Reading posts about how every airline is cutting back on t's and c's, hearing how poor new contracts are, and knowing how much my own employer is trying to reduce our agreements despite record profits, I wonder how, as a community, we have allowed this to happen.
15 years ago, a CEO of an airline said that if a monkey turned up on his doorstep with a CPL, he would put him/her in the R/H seat of a jet, and pay them 30k p.a. No doubt with a Final Salary pension, LoL, Private health, share options, etc.
Now the monkey's brother/sister turns up on the doorstep with a ATPL and TYPE RATING and still gets 30k p.a. AND nothing else. I don't believe that employment opportunities now are that much different from then. We seemed to have allowed, industrywide, the decision-makers to get away with it. If I was them I would too.
I suppose what I am trying to say is that we all must bear responsibility for allowing this to happen. Maybe it came about during the time in the mid 90's when things were tight and concessions were made to help an airline's survival. But now, with just about every airline posting good, healthy profits, are our t's and c's being allowed to still be eroded. Call me a Communist, but I thought we should all benefit from our employers' success.
The questions that I want to ask to my fellow pilots is; are we all now pi55ed off enough now to actually do something about it? If we are, what? and, judging by the level of dissatisfaction, is BALPA the right medium to do it through?
I put these questions to the house!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Blighty
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The background issues as to why terms and conditions have declined might be complex. However, there are two key political issues which make pilots weak.
First and foremost it is a highly vocational profession. A proportion of pilots are so desperate to fly they almost cannot live without the job. Employers understand this key point and exploit it to the full.
Second, pilots outside major airlines, are reluctant to form strong and aggressive trade unions. Quite why I really cannot fathom. You only have to look at British Airways to see the benefit of 100% membership. Elsewhere it just never quite seems to happen.
See my previous post on Emirates on this page. £30,000 for an expat contract. The only reason for leaving Britain for such a job would be a passion for long haul flying and living Dubai. There is almost no opportunity out there to better yourself financially.
First and foremost it is a highly vocational profession. A proportion of pilots are so desperate to fly they almost cannot live without the job. Employers understand this key point and exploit it to the full.
Second, pilots outside major airlines, are reluctant to form strong and aggressive trade unions. Quite why I really cannot fathom. You only have to look at British Airways to see the benefit of 100% membership. Elsewhere it just never quite seems to happen.
See my previous post on Emirates on this page. £30,000 for an expat contract. The only reason for leaving Britain for such a job would be a passion for long haul flying and living Dubai. There is almost no opportunity out there to better yourself financially.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: London
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another factor is the seniority system which is more or less unique to our profession. Whilst it has many advantages it effectively blocks the largescale movement of labour. If another airline is paying 20% more on salaries overall, then it would still not be worthwhile for most pilots to move because they would move from being Captain on paypoint X or FO on paypoint Y to junior teaboy on paypoint zero.
In a truly capitalist economy, supply and demand, and the movement of labour, balance terms and conditions accross the industry.
If you were the CEO of a major airline and saw anew low cost carrier coming in and trying to build up market share what would you do?
The obvious answer is to try and reduce your own wage bill in order to compete, and you have the advantage in knowing that the majority of your senior pilots will have little alternative other than to accept the changes, because they cannot afford to start again from scratch.
You may have a fight on your hands with the unions but many pilots, for whatever reason, are reluctant to join, and more importantly support a union.
Add to that Mrs Thatchers legacy whereby you can only take action over your own particular problem and not those facing the group as a whole, and it is hardly surprising that things have deteriorated.
In other countries strikes are much more wide spread. If a small group is attacked then the whole factory, or group of factories, or even industry will take collective action.
In a truly capitalist economy, supply and demand, and the movement of labour, balance terms and conditions accross the industry.
If you were the CEO of a major airline and saw anew low cost carrier coming in and trying to build up market share what would you do?
The obvious answer is to try and reduce your own wage bill in order to compete, and you have the advantage in knowing that the majority of your senior pilots will have little alternative other than to accept the changes, because they cannot afford to start again from scratch.
You may have a fight on your hands with the unions but many pilots, for whatever reason, are reluctant to join, and more importantly support a union.
Add to that Mrs Thatchers legacy whereby you can only take action over your own particular problem and not those facing the group as a whole, and it is hardly surprising that things have deteriorated.
In other countries strikes are much more wide spread. If a small group is attacked then the whole factory, or group of factories, or even industry will take collective action.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a figment of my imagination
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree it is a vocational profession, but when pilots start on 17k p.a., after paying 60k+ for the qualifications, with very little chance of earning big bucks, and little job security, then how long will it last.
Allowing this undermines us all, and we will then start to suffer like the medical profession, when 'cheap' labour from abroad will fill the position.
The seniority system, I agree, reduces the movement of labour, but it also prevents the airlines from always getting rid of the 'expensive' guys at the top of the list, thus undermining any job security. The incremental pay system rewards loyalty and experience, but these too are under attack. Demonstrating the airlines are wanting to remove any 'carrots' no doubt to be replaced with a stick.
Mrs Thatcher's legacy has put unions back, and got rid of things such as secondary picketing, but if we had a union that has strong represntation and commitment from it's members, and was directed exactly what it is to do, then surely conditions will improve eventually for all of us. It has worked well so far for Virgin and North Sea helicopter pilots, why not for all of us?
Allowing this undermines us all, and we will then start to suffer like the medical profession, when 'cheap' labour from abroad will fill the position.
The seniority system, I agree, reduces the movement of labour, but it also prevents the airlines from always getting rid of the 'expensive' guys at the top of the list, thus undermining any job security. The incremental pay system rewards loyalty and experience, but these too are under attack. Demonstrating the airlines are wanting to remove any 'carrots' no doubt to be replaced with a stick.
Mrs Thatcher's legacy has put unions back, and got rid of things such as secondary picketing, but if we had a union that has strong represntation and commitment from it's members, and was directed exactly what it is to do, then surely conditions will improve eventually for all of us. It has worked well so far for Virgin and North Sea helicopter pilots, why not for all of us?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Blighty
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kakpipe Cosmonaut, I suppose that Union membership in Britain would be stronger if BALPA was generally held in higher esteem by pilots.
Personally, I think that Jim Mclauslan is a much stronger Gen. Sec. than Chris Darke and that things are better in BALPA as a result. However, when pilots have a negative experience with BALPA they tend to wander off and not return. From my experience (I have been a member continuously for 15 years) BALPA is a real curates egg. My good experiences are cancelled out by my duff experiences.
At the heart of this is BALPA's third party relationship with the airlines. I.e. they also depend on the airlines doing good business. Therefore, by default, they will only ever go so far with an issue. Airline commercial management understand this point.
I have seen some appaling treatment of pilots over the years and ask myself why it is that we do not take collective action to support wronged individuals.
I agree, why pay 60k for a 17k, unstable job? Well, my first salary in 1989 was 10k flying a Shed. It was probably the best flying job I ever had but I didn't know it at the time. I too was initially blind to the issues with my passion foor flying. However the company went bust and I grew up in a hurry.
There are lots of macro and background issues too as to why the profession has suffered. Ultimately we have to blame ourselves.
Personally, I think that Jim Mclauslan is a much stronger Gen. Sec. than Chris Darke and that things are better in BALPA as a result. However, when pilots have a negative experience with BALPA they tend to wander off and not return. From my experience (I have been a member continuously for 15 years) BALPA is a real curates egg. My good experiences are cancelled out by my duff experiences.
At the heart of this is BALPA's third party relationship with the airlines. I.e. they also depend on the airlines doing good business. Therefore, by default, they will only ever go so far with an issue. Airline commercial management understand this point.
I have seen some appaling treatment of pilots over the years and ask myself why it is that we do not take collective action to support wronged individuals.
I agree, why pay 60k for a 17k, unstable job? Well, my first salary in 1989 was 10k flying a Shed. It was probably the best flying job I ever had but I didn't know it at the time. I too was initially blind to the issues with my passion foor flying. However the company went bust and I grew up in a hurry.
There are lots of macro and background issues too as to why the profession has suffered. Ultimately we have to blame ourselves.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Concerning the unions and their role: it has been said that Thatcher isolated groups so that they could only campaign and operate within their own direct sphere. In many fields this was a good thing for the country as a whole.
However, and this is true for most of the European countries I know, the national union is that of the national carrier. In relation to what they have achieved for their chosen few, they have done very very little for the profession on a national scale. The national officers have been scant in their endevours when compared to the more traditional industrial unions, who are much better organised on a national scale. They have stood up for their industry as a whole, and conducted local bargaining when necessary. Aircrew unions have allowed T's & C's via e.g. FTL's etc to steadily drip away. This was a national issue and they did nowt.
On basic issues there is so much more that the union 'leaders' could have done to oppose the steady decline of the profession. It hasn't reached coal miners' depths yet, but it is on the slide, and without any fight on the horizon. Lots of huff & puff.
The arrogance to charge 1% for what you get is disgraceful. The best advertising any union could have is to demonstrate where they want the profession as a whole to go, and show they are en-route to that goal. All tbis argument about 100% membership within 1 company or another is irrelevant. A good workers' council, as on the continent, with an adult professional management/employees relationship and 100% representation, will achieve staisfactory local conditions. The national union can then concentrate on the foundations of the profession.
Sadly, they are blinkered by the national carrier and forgetful of their true members.
I'm sure most unions, if 100% of pilots were members, would receive more funds from outside the national carrier. It would then be upto the smaller groups to demand value for their money and improvement in the general conditions of the profession. Fine tuning locally will always be necessary. Sometimes it seems as if the union itself enjoys a divide and rule policy among the lessor members so that they can keep the status quo with the national carrier on top.
However, and this is true for most of the European countries I know, the national union is that of the national carrier. In relation to what they have achieved for their chosen few, they have done very very little for the profession on a national scale. The national officers have been scant in their endevours when compared to the more traditional industrial unions, who are much better organised on a national scale. They have stood up for their industry as a whole, and conducted local bargaining when necessary. Aircrew unions have allowed T's & C's via e.g. FTL's etc to steadily drip away. This was a national issue and they did nowt.
On basic issues there is so much more that the union 'leaders' could have done to oppose the steady decline of the profession. It hasn't reached coal miners' depths yet, but it is on the slide, and without any fight on the horizon. Lots of huff & puff.
The arrogance to charge 1% for what you get is disgraceful. The best advertising any union could have is to demonstrate where they want the profession as a whole to go, and show they are en-route to that goal. All tbis argument about 100% membership within 1 company or another is irrelevant. A good workers' council, as on the continent, with an adult professional management/employees relationship and 100% representation, will achieve staisfactory local conditions. The national union can then concentrate on the foundations of the profession.
Sadly, they are blinkered by the national carrier and forgetful of their true members.
I'm sure most unions, if 100% of pilots were members, would receive more funds from outside the national carrier. It would then be upto the smaller groups to demand value for their money and improvement in the general conditions of the profession. Fine tuning locally will always be necessary. Sometimes it seems as if the union itself enjoys a divide and rule policy among the lessor members so that they can keep the status quo with the national carrier on top.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North America
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What have the unions accomplished?
As I see them in the USA, they have managed to reduce the working salaries of 20 year veterans by more than 50%, allowed for pensions to be sqandered or to get rid of them completly.
I am now seeing on the corporate side where management companies are taking fees in exccess of pilot fees just to join owner and pilot.
Business will screw everyone until there is nothing left to screw
I am now seeing on the corporate side where management companies are taking fees in exccess of pilot fees just to join owner and pilot.
Business will screw everyone until there is nothing left to screw
