Aer Lingus Pilots to Strike

[Visual Calls]

It's very simple as Capt Kremin points out.
Aer Lingus freely entered into agreements with the pilots regarding terms and conditions. Aer Lingus have unilaterally reneged on said agreements. Furthermore, they have rejected the pilots repeated offers to enter into negotiations. End of story.

Many are keen to portray it as "just another base" so what's the problem? No problem, the pilots are more keen than any management figure for a multitude of bases. Who do you think has more committment to a strong prosperous Aer Lingus, a transient management team or a lifer pilot?
But the dynamic is simple and the point is missed by most of our detractors. Let me spell it out:
BFS get paid less. The next base gets paid a bit less again, then the next (this pattern will sound familiar to ryanair pilots). Crews at cheaper bases will overnight in DUB and operate DUB routes. So DUB will stagnate. Bye bye command. Then along will come the management and say, sorry lads you cost more than all your colleagues, we'll have to pay you a lot less. Take it or leave it (sound familiar again, ryanair pilots?).

This industry is going down the tubes fast. Why? Because the utter apathy of most pilots allows management to walk all over us. Stand up people, get some backbone and improve your lot.
If we loose this situation, our careers will be gone to hell anyway, so may as well die fighting.

BTW, ryanair pilots. Why not join us on the picket line and together we can stop the rot destroying Irish aviation?

[DrKev]

The story as I understand it

An airline sets up a new base and wishes to introduce T's and C's appropriate tp that local market a market in another ciountry and you take that to ean your career is under threat?

Actually, for a number of pilots, it is. While the seniority system may be an outdated system it is still in place in Aer Lingus and a very difficult thing to replace. As I understand the situation talking to Aer Lingus flight crew in the last few days, there is a long standing agreement between pilots and management that seniority must be respected and that all flight crew in the pointy end of the green machines should be on equal T & C's. The proposed deal for new staff at Belfast, for example, direct entry captains, means that this is not the case.

In effect, people waiting patiently for eight years for their turn at promotion are now told that, contrary to the existing agreements in place, they will be blatantly ignored in favour of new arrivals who may well have less experience than they have. If they want a chance at those positions they must resign their current place and re-apply for the Belfast positions with terms and conditions below what they already have and no guarantees of resuming work with the same employer.

In addition to this, there would be nothing to stop Aer Lingus management firing staff in Dublin and transferring the cheaper 'Northern' staff down south in their place. Anyone remember the Irish Ferries dispute? It's a very similar situation and at that time the public were firmly behind the striking Irish Ferries employees!! Go here for a reminder of the issues involved.

Aer Lingus management are not respecting their existing agreements, in fact they have made very clear that they have no intention of respecting those agreements. Remember, after 9/11, Aer Lingus staff themselves, through their unions, approached their management with a view to taking measures to ensure the survival of the airline. For those same workers to be treated in this manner now is understandably a very difficult pill for them to swallow.

As to "T's and C's appropriate tp that local market" (sic) there are a number of people north of the border who are very annoyed that Aer Lingus does not see fit to offer new employees similar T & C's to those of other crew members, based in Belfast or elsewhere.

Another agreement in place is that the senior flight crew who are senior IALPA members are given appropriate leave to deal with issues with management. Management have made this very difficult, allocating the "IALPA days" when management are not available and offering to talk when their IALPA counterparts are flying. Not exactly a great way to maintain good industrial relations.

It seems to me that the last annoyance of IALPA members is the relative silence of their union, who otherwise have been doing a commendable job of trying to negotiate with their management but seem lost when it comes to explaining to the public why this industrial action is taking place. Why is it that I, mere SLF, have to detail these kinds of things here based on my recollections of phone conversations with very worried and angry flight crew? Irish Ferries staff were strongly supported by the public in their time but Aer Lingus flight crew are getting blasted for trying to avoid the same thing.

I stand behind these dedicated, professional men and women 100% and I urge you all to do so too. In this day and age as a privatised company, Aer Lingus is not the Irish national carrier any more than Ryanair or Aer Arann. However, the dedication over the last ten years of a majority of the flight crew, cabin crew and ground staff to at ensure the survival of one of the best known Irish brands is a cause for pride, IMHO. That the management of an Irish company would treat it's employees with such contempt and disrespect is a cause for shame.

Here endeth my sermon.

[411A]

Aer Lingus said it "hopes to operate a limited schedule of European flights" next week during a two-day pilot strike called in protest of its decision to open a Belfast base (ATWOnline, Aug. 15). The airline said it has agreed to wet-lease "a number" of aircraft for Aug. 21-22.

Management nearly always wins.

[Farty Flaps]

The industry needs a couple of companies like AL or BA with the old systems of seniority and salaries in order to give something for other pilot groups to aspire to and compare vis avis Tand C's in their relevant negotiations.

I f these type of companies loose their positions as industry role models in Tand c's we are left we the alternative. Companies like RYR will become the yardstick then we are all fecked. Companies fed by greedy posing rich kids who would sell their souls for a shiney 800 an early left seat and 10 minutes in an eastern euopeans hosty's knickers.

[omoko joe]

an interesting but valid point made on the thread below to help muddy the waters..
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=288338

I can't see the Assemebly boys standing for a wholsale import of crew who are 'technically' from a foreign country. Every other NI based airline hires at least a good proportion of locals.

[An Paddy Eile]

I have to say that in this discussion, as DrKev says, it is really important to remember the Irish Ferries scenario. Have a read of the link he posted. That, in my opinion, is the real threat from Aer Lingus management. In this race to the bottom, it has become acceptable to completely ignore the effect on current staff. The argument always is that the new staff are willing to accept the lower terms and conditions so where is the problem. The word Ryanair is a perfect answer.

Irish Ferries went to the trouble of re-registering their vessels abroad so that they would not even be required to pay the new staff the Irish minimum wage. All who watched the saga unfold were angry and insulted that an Irish company could attempt such a flagrant abuse of new employees, by offering them a package that was designed to be attractive when compared to their extremely low average wage in their home country, but which would have been illegal under Irish law. It became worse when it was apparent that the existing employees would need to move out to make room for these cheap staff. At least with Irish Ferries, the management had an argument that Irish Ferries would be unable to survive otherwise as passenger traffic had dropped to record low levels.


Aer Lingus is a profitable company and has been for a few years now since 2001. There is no need to offer new T's & C's for survival, only for profit maximisation. That existing employees should be put at risk in the name of good business, those same employees who have been flying the green machines for decades and therefore are also responsible for the positive position the company is currently in, is outrageous. A few years ago, Bank of Ireland recorded the highest annual profit in their history. Then they announced that were laying off 1,800 staff to reduce costs. How can you possibly condone that behaviour?

What is the difference between a company which re-registers itself to another country so that it can undercut the pay at it's home base and one which explains that no other country's local market deserves the same package as Ireland? Aer Lingus are covering their real intentions with the MO'L type spin of it being in accordance with the local market. Do you ever think they would find a country where the local market warrants a package better than that on offer in Dublin? Of course not. It is a smoke screen to a desire to get away with as much as possible. This is about more than business. Ethics are involved here too. Unfortunately that is a concept that modern society is finding hard to recall.

[alibaba]

Two very good posts by Visual Calls and DrKev.

Your "livliehoods" oh give me a break. Your "livliehood" is not under threat.

Will you answer points put to you Oneworld by other posters? Or are you about to scurry away with your tail between your legs?

Every drop in T+C's in each new base will lead to another drop in the next base. This is the way the pattern follows. It is slow and insidious until you find that your pay or T+C's is 25% or so less than another pilot in the same company out of another base. Then the company will seek to lower the original higher paid base.

It is the slow erosion of terms that airline pilots (that excludes you oneworld) need to be aware of. This is why you will find other professions making progressively more and more money and being treated a whole lot better than how pilots are treated with the slow decay of wages and T+C's.

You see your livelihood is not at threat oneworld..... But every pilots on this forum is. Every time you lower T+C's you lower the bench mark for pilots in that company and others. Every pilot in every company will have an affect on other pilots in a different company. You could say we rely on each other in many ways. Pilot’s livelihoods are at threat from continuing lowering of T+C's across the industry and it needs to be stopped.

You have to stop this somewhere and EI pilots have stated where they are going to stop the rot.

All I can say is well done! I wish other groups of pilots in other airlines would take note and do the same.

[ZeBedie]

The airline said it has agreed to wet-lease "a number" of aircraft for Aug. 21-22.

That's not so bad - it'll cost a fortune!

[mill island]

why has no-one pointed out the seemingly obvious. If ALT succeed in setting up a new base ANYWHERE with lower T&Cs the next and undeniable move will be to start flying those pilots into and out of DUB thereby undermining the work of the existing employees. This is not rocket science..........
If slots can be moved out of Ireland to NI, why not to JFK, BOS, ORD, AMS, CDG, and on and on. ALT might just decide to put on one early and one late flight to LHR from DUB.....
They claim to have ordered new aircraft(although waht DM actually said was that they had "put in place plans" to buy aircraft....no form orders have shown up anywhere!!) If they do ever actually take delivery, it is likely each new aircraft will go to a new base and then commence flights into DUB....
Local T&C and pay rates is a red herring in the aviation business as it pertains to pilots. Pilots are mobile workers on mobile assets. All you need to do is "base" them in a low cost environment and then "operate" them into your chosen market....look at the shipping industry. Irish Ferries was a wake up call. They operate slow cumbersome craft that cannot easily relocate too far from your market area. Aircraft can go home to eastern europe every night, and if you've succeeded in screwing the working conditions sufficiently, they can be back in your home base by start of business the next morning...........or of course you simply "overnight" the new pilots in your base, putting them up ála Ryanair at their own expense.....game over

[OneWorld22]

Every drop in T+C's in each new base will lead to another drop in the next base. This is the way the pattern follows. It is slow and insidious until you find that your pay or T+C's is 25% or so less than another pilot in the same company out of another base. Then the company will seek to lower the original higher paid base.

That is not how it works, you are deliberately trying to paint a false picture to justify this stance. Airlines do this, companies do this. Do you think that a company like Intel for example will pay it's Californian workers the same as workers in Israel or elsewhere? Of course they don't and paying market salaries in one country does not effect the salaries paid in the higher cost jurisdiction. No company with a presence in multiple foreign markets will have one blanket set of T's and C;'s they will apply for everyone, that is absurd.

Your argument doesn't wash. The idea that somehow Belfast would lead to a lowering of T's and C's elsewhere is simply pie in the sky stuff. The general public (your customers) just cannot understand your stance on this. It is absurd.

[Skintman]

It might seem controversial, but isn't it just normal supply and demand. When there's a glut of pilots (as there has been for a few years), T & C's get squeezed down. When a shortage happens, things go in reverse, as airlines poach and are forced to offer better T & C's to recruit.

If you want T & C's to stay the same when there's a glut, then they need to stay the same when there's a shortage.

Skintman

[Visual Calls]

OW22, you may think the argument is absurd. In that case you no nothing about ryanair, for example.
History in a nutshell: DUB once the best paid base in ryanair. Each subsequent base on less money than previous. These lower paid contractors now working ex-DUB with no longer the old well-paid contracts on offer.
Also, what is your stance of the basic issue: that the company have unilaterally broken freely entered into agreements and then refuse any form of negotiation?

[Desert Diner]

You have to stop this somewhere and EI pilots have stated where they are going to stop the rot.

Unfortunately, they will probably achieve this by running EI out of business. I doubt there will be much hope of Bertie & Co. comming to the rescue this time.

[Visual Calls]

Unfortunately, they will probably achieve this by running EI out of business.

How will honouring the existing profitable agreements run EI out of business?
Despite management spin, EI has one of the lowest unit costs in Europe. Hardly the stuff of an overburdened legacy carrier.

[michaelknight]

Quote
"Do you think that a company like Intel for example will pay it's Californian workers the same as workers in Israel or elsewhere? Of course they don't and paying market salaries in one country does not effect the salaries paid in the higher cost jurisdiction."

And would a middle manager working in Intel be required to resign his job, giving up his pension should he be moved or be willing to move to Isreal or somewhere else. I think not. The whole situation created by the management of Aer Lingus is a disgrace. You can argue the point all you want. It most definately dosen't wash!

[Desert Diner]

I meant a prolonged pilot strike and resulting short term wet leasing.

Low cost or not, EI won't be able to last long under those conditions.

It is unfortunate but Irish Management, in all industires, seem to have learned well from MOL.

EI has one of the lowest unit costs in Europe

Unfortunately, competing against FR, their RPMs are probably some of the lowest also.

[Seat1APlease]

Do you think that a company like Intel for example will pay it's Californian workers the same as workers in Israel or elsewhere?

But workers in California do their work there, as do those in Israel. The difference is that pilots, by their nature, can be based in one place yet asked to operate elsewhere. Unless there is a clear agreement that they cannot use pilots from a cheap base do do the work of pilots from a base with better T&C's then that is what any management will eventually strive to do. You will find crew being positioned about to achieve minimum cost levels. You may find that eventually most shorthaul crews are based elsewhere and only long-haul crews who are duty limited based on full T&C's.
There is little new under the sun, BA introduced cheap bases in MAN and LGW but it was agreed and understood by both sides that if a MAN crew ever operated MAN-LHR then all hell would break loose.

[Desert Diner]

And would a middle manager working in Intel be required to resign his job, giving up his pension should he be moved or be willing to move to Isreal or somewhere else. I think not.

Apples to Oranges. Managers are not unionized while Pilots are.

[michaelknight]

Apples to Oranges. Managers are not unionized while Pilots are.

Desert Diner, my suggestion was in the context of a captain in an airline, any airline being considered as middle management in an organisations structure.

[DrKev]

I meant a prolonged pilot strike and resulting short term wet leasing.
Low cost or not, EI won't be able to last long under those conditions.

Exactly, which is why that will never happen and why strike action is an important part of industrial relations when things go screwy. Remember, not running the company into the ground is part of management's job, and keeping people working is part of the union's job. Something, somewhere will happen to bring everyone to a situation they can all live with.

Apples to Oranges.

Yes, lets stop comparing Intel to Aer Lingus. Nice try but the analogy isn't really working. But lets stick to the important point - yes we can talk about differing pay scales in different global regions, that's all fair enough, but should people in one part of the world be expected to accept worse working conditions?

Lets take this argument to it's most ridiculous logical conclusions. Lets take a clothing factory somewhere in a non-fictional far eastern country. If the factories they work in and the hours the work are similar to a European standard, yes, their salary should still be relevant to their local market. No problems there, everyone will agree. However, if they worked in a horrible grimy sweat shop, should that be more acceptable because of where they live?

The whole California-Israel argument is pretty much invalid anyway. We are talking about Ireland and the UK. Yes, some laws and tax and pension structures are different but we are basically the same bunch of people and we expect the same level of decent treatment, as do people all over Europe.

Within the same company, competing for the same positions and promotions, they should have the same basic rights and treatment. Look at the UN as an example. Yes salaries have a component that is locale related but it's the one contract no matter where in the world you work at any given point in time.