Thomas Cook Pilots set for Industrial Action ?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Greater Manchester
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi, I received an email today asking for pilots to go to Canada this winter, from both MYT and TCX, to operate both airbus and boeing aircraft. It also stated that the company was also looking for pilots on FIXED contracts, if they would like to stay on for the winter season. Another twist to the plot.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you have misunderstood me. I am certainly not advocating laying off anyone and then getting in temporary summer pilots.
I Have Control
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North-West England
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look at the big picture Foxmoth....methinks you are at no risk of demotion and enjoy your winter bonus out East or West..maybe for your retirement or private plane...who knows?
However some folk are not so fortunate.
And consider the principle of temporary labour, which ultimately hits everybody's T & C's. Even yours.
However some folk are not so fortunate.
And consider the principle of temporary labour, which ultimately hits everybody's T & C's. Even yours.
I think you have misunderstood me. I am certainly not advocating laying off anyone and then getting in temporary summer pilots.
Some of our guys were flying 90 hours a month last winter (tcx) ask them about seasonal imbalances!
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not head for Canada in the winter so it is not a problem for me if we do or do not do it and if it does go I wait with interest to see what the company does, my own feeling is that they will shed more permanent pilots and use more temp pilots in the summer which actually achieves the reverse of what everyone wants,and I very much doubt that this will actually cause them to retain any more, if you feel that is not the case then good luck to you - I will not stand in your way.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unlike NACUD who seems very upset by the idea of the Canadian exchange going I am really not too concerned either way, - as you have picked up I am unlikely to be effected by the merger,in fact not being effected I think makes it easier to look at this objectively, but it is very easy to get blinkered with what you think and IMHO this could actually turn round the wrong way, NACUD seems absolutely convinced of this, I am not so sure but believe people do need to think about it and that is why I am playing devils advocate. If we do stop going to Canada I hope I am wrong. I am not interested in getting further into this argument and will wait with interest to see what actually happens, whatever happens I hope for minimum job losses and wish the best for those at the lower end of the seniority lists.
Last edited by foxmoth; 21st Sep 2007 at 10:31.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So let me see if I have got this straight about what is being said and what is being supported. In essence:
“temporary summer pilots is the solution”
The result being:
Dry leased aircraft to Canada for the winter that would result in both LHS and RHS pilots being laid off or LHS pilots being demoted (because of seniority) and RHS pilots having some free time. Or, just F/Os going to and from the UK and Canada, with LHS seats being filled by nationals, who are then either laid off or demoted during the quiet periods.
Whatever way you look at it temporary summer pilots, be they either short-term summer Captains followed by demotion in the winter or F/Os on a summer only contract is an extremely poor solution. It would be the first step to pilots being recruited on transitory contracts in the same way that cabin crew are. I would be surprised if any individual would be willing to accept such a contract unless they were desperate or prepared to pay over £30,000 for a type conversion course. Temporary contracts do not usually attract any of the benefits that are part of permanent employment contracts and need to be avoided like the plague.
The preferred way forward, as expressed by the majority on this thread, seems to be to deny permanent employment opportunities to others while looking after number 1.
What is quite patently being failed to be grasped is the fact that the agreement actually creates full time permanent positions in both seats for each airline. And if you don’t believe me ask a member of the MYT CC who have agreed the policy with management for a good number of years. It has also been known for a member of the CC to go to Canada for the winter.
This winter the plan is to send a number of aircraft and if those aircraft were not to go it is quite plausible that the company could decide that they were surplus to requirements and either return them to the lease company or dry lease them to another airline. There would then be a requirement for further redundancies. The Canadian flying would undoubtedly be done by our competitors and the flying that those aircraft would have done next summer could then be subbed out to the likes of Monarch, Excel and others.
There are far bigger issues to be tackled than this misunderstanding that has apparently so wound up a number individuals, who have not taken the time or the trouble to adequately research all the issues involved.
For those of you who may have taken part in the web chat a few nights ago or since read the transcript on the TCX/MYT portal it would be far more advantageous to concentrate on ensuring that we are all working to the same contracts of employment, (because at the moment they are quite different), a common scheduling agreement, day off payment scheme to name but a few. Because, reading between the lines of some of the answers the Company may be prepared to start operating differently.
Do not allow yourselves or the CC to become distracted by an issue that will, in time go away.
“temporary summer pilots is the solution”
The result being:
Dry leased aircraft to Canada for the winter that would result in both LHS and RHS pilots being laid off or LHS pilots being demoted (because of seniority) and RHS pilots having some free time. Or, just F/Os going to and from the UK and Canada, with LHS seats being filled by nationals, who are then either laid off or demoted during the quiet periods.
Whatever way you look at it temporary summer pilots, be they either short-term summer Captains followed by demotion in the winter or F/Os on a summer only contract is an extremely poor solution. It would be the first step to pilots being recruited on transitory contracts in the same way that cabin crew are. I would be surprised if any individual would be willing to accept such a contract unless they were desperate or prepared to pay over £30,000 for a type conversion course. Temporary contracts do not usually attract any of the benefits that are part of permanent employment contracts and need to be avoided like the plague.
The preferred way forward, as expressed by the majority on this thread, seems to be to deny permanent employment opportunities to others while looking after number 1.
What is quite patently being failed to be grasped is the fact that the agreement actually creates full time permanent positions in both seats for each airline. And if you don’t believe me ask a member of the MYT CC who have agreed the policy with management for a good number of years. It has also been known for a member of the CC to go to Canada for the winter.
This winter the plan is to send a number of aircraft and if those aircraft were not to go it is quite plausible that the company could decide that they were surplus to requirements and either return them to the lease company or dry lease them to another airline. There would then be a requirement for further redundancies. The Canadian flying would undoubtedly be done by our competitors and the flying that those aircraft would have done next summer could then be subbed out to the likes of Monarch, Excel and others.
There are far bigger issues to be tackled than this misunderstanding that has apparently so wound up a number individuals, who have not taken the time or the trouble to adequately research all the issues involved.
For those of you who may have taken part in the web chat a few nights ago or since read the transcript on the TCX/MYT portal it would be far more advantageous to concentrate on ensuring that we are all working to the same contracts of employment, (because at the moment they are quite different), a common scheduling agreement, day off payment scheme to name but a few. Because, reading between the lines of some of the answers the Company may be prepared to start operating differently.
Do not allow yourselves or the CC to become distracted by an issue that will, in time go away.
So whats to stop the company doing more of it in the future? Fast
forward to 2009 and 3 new aircraft show up along with 30 canadians to fly them in both the left and right seat, again no promotions for tcx crews and no recrutment. Or even if there was no expansion, but 20 capatins retired, 20 more canadian capatins then come over and still no promotion or recrutment.
All this while the company is trying to demote and sack lots of UK pilots. So lets see who exactly is looking after number one.
May be NACUD you could volunteir to be demoted or made redundant so one of your canadian friends could come over and replace you?
Most of us agree that the SSV contract should continue in some form, so lets get rid of all this talk of redundancies and demotions and lets work out how to run this contract so we all benefit.
forward to 2009 and 3 new aircraft show up along with 30 canadians to fly them in both the left and right seat, again no promotions for tcx crews and no recrutment. Or even if there was no expansion, but 20 capatins retired, 20 more canadian capatins then come over and still no promotion or recrutment.
All this while the company is trying to demote and sack lots of UK pilots. So lets see who exactly is looking after number one.
May be NACUD you could volunteir to be demoted or made redundant so one of your canadian friends could come over and replace you?
Most of us agree that the SSV contract should continue in some form, so lets get rid of all this talk of redundancies and demotions and lets work out how to run this contract so we all benefit.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I correct in summing up the previous two posts in this way.
The Canadian contracts are ok so long as MYT/TCX crews are NOT under threat. (And the deal is negotiated properly through BALPA)
Right now these crews ARE under threat
So no Canadians (or any other temporary contract employees).
It that's what you're saying, I fully agree
The Canadian contracts are ok so long as MYT/TCX crews are NOT under threat. (And the deal is negotiated properly through BALPA)
Right now these crews ARE under threat
So no Canadians (or any other temporary contract employees).
It that's what you're saying, I fully agree
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Jonty.
It's the thin end of the wedge. Continue with this ex-MYT practice, and you can kiss goodbye to any future with the new TCX.
I've got no problem with Canadian / US guys making up the numbers, in the RHS only, as long as there are no redundancies.
No redundancies = No demotions. Tupe.
I'm sure Manny will realise that we don't want any dispute going into the first 'Peaks' of the new company. Just won't look too good to the shareholders.
Maybe others (FP / SS) will follow Mr Bloodworth, as this is not the way people are managed in Thomas Cook.
Let's hope this is sorted before the press get hold of it..
The pilots will not back down wrt the Canadian issue.
CS
It's the thin end of the wedge. Continue with this ex-MYT practice, and you can kiss goodbye to any future with the new TCX.
I've got no problem with Canadian / US guys making up the numbers, in the RHS only, as long as there are no redundancies.
No redundancies = No demotions. Tupe.
I'm sure Manny will realise that we don't want any dispute going into the first 'Peaks' of the new company. Just won't look too good to the shareholders.
Maybe others (FP / SS) will follow Mr Bloodworth, as this is not the way people are managed in Thomas Cook.
Let's hope this is sorted before the press get hold of it..
The pilots will not back down wrt the Canadian issue.
CS
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: variable
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do they have the neck to talk about redundancies while planning to have temporary crew from overseas next year!
Time to ground some aeroplanes, and to hell with the shareholders.
Time to ground some aeroplanes, and to hell with the shareholders.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tin tin, Crewing's Slave and number 7
Like you, I am not at all impressed by the "Sabre rattling" management
of the companies formerly known as MYT and TCX.
Live by the sword, die by the sword
I just hope BALPA and it's members have the balls for it!
Like you, I am not at all impressed by the "Sabre rattling" management
of the companies formerly known as MYT and TCX.
Live by the sword, die by the sword
I just hope BALPA and it's members have the balls for it!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we loose this then there is no point in working for an outfit that rides so rough-shod over it's employees.
So, you ask are we up for it?
I ask, what have we got to loose. Accept this, and we are surely accepting the thin edge of a never ending wedge, and I'd rather work for a different outfit to be honest. Why should managament rake in millions of dollars in synergy bonuses, while there are numerous guys at risk of redundancy and demotion?
There aren't many who post on here from MYT/TCX, but rest assured the feeling is just as strong on the combined Balpa website.
Bring it on. Peaks just around the corner. We're in a strong position.
CS
So, you ask are we up for it?
I ask, what have we got to loose. Accept this, and we are surely accepting the thin edge of a never ending wedge, and I'd rather work for a different outfit to be honest. Why should managament rake in millions of dollars in synergy bonuses, while there are numerous guys at risk of redundancy and demotion?
There aren't many who post on here from MYT/TCX, but rest assured the feeling is just as strong on the combined Balpa website.
Bring it on. Peaks just around the corner. We're in a strong position.
CS