RYANAIR thoughts
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 70
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Day Dreamer
In certain circumstances your charge of cobblers may hold up, if that is so I will be first to acknowledge such. I certainly was not trying to maliciously influence the debate, if that is what you can call the bun fight I have been viewing over the past couple of weeks or so. As I state in other posts, I am not a pilot and no longer work in aviation, haven't done so for many years, but I do get a might teed off when I see horror stories or wild speculation such as I have seen from the likes of RSS, especially when I have seen the way unions work proactively with employers to ensure longevity of the company and their members' jobs.
If 50% of the pilot group were union members then a ballot would be held however if you have a look at Statutory right to union recognitionyou will see that the situation is more complicated. I accept that in certain circumstances all pilots who are employees would take part in the ballot, the nature of the contract between RYR and BRK pilots would have to be determined as they appear to be independent contractors who may be gone the next day with no recompense, perhaps even more reason for them to join a union. If they cannot be shown to be direct employees then they would have no part in the ballot. I emphasise, I have no idea of the true situation within RYR but that is greatly due to the distorted postings of the pro management peeps on here.
The main thrust of my previous post was to say to RSS that his much vaunted 'ballot' held at EMA etc was cobblers, toss, hot air. It has as much validity in law as the anal expulsions of MOL.
Please do not misunderstand me, I fly no flag for BALPA, I haven't since I knew that it had once been headed by that animated skull, Norman Tebbit. I think that pilots would be better represented by a larger union such as Unite but most of the right wingers (if PPrune is anything to go by) would rather take a pay cut or be boiled in oil before getting into bed with a load of lefties. Nor do I hold RYR in any great esteem, their fruit machine business model stinks.
Finally, any talk of bases being closed because MOL has thrown the teddy out of the pram should be taken with a pinch (cellar) of salt. Mr avaricous, and which CEO is not?, would be strung up by the dangly bits then spit roasted by his shareholders should he close profitable bases. Remeber the boast of RYR is that it is UK's largest airline, I think that would melt away if he closed UK bases.
Awaiting incoming.
If 50% of the pilot group were union members then a ballot would be held however if you have a look at Statutory right to union recognitionyou will see that the situation is more complicated. I accept that in certain circumstances all pilots who are employees would take part in the ballot, the nature of the contract between RYR and BRK pilots would have to be determined as they appear to be independent contractors who may be gone the next day with no recompense, perhaps even more reason for them to join a union. If they cannot be shown to be direct employees then they would have no part in the ballot. I emphasise, I have no idea of the true situation within RYR but that is greatly due to the distorted postings of the pro management peeps on here.
The main thrust of my previous post was to say to RSS that his much vaunted 'ballot' held at EMA etc was cobblers, toss, hot air. It has as much validity in law as the anal expulsions of MOL.
Please do not misunderstand me, I fly no flag for BALPA, I haven't since I knew that it had once been headed by that animated skull, Norman Tebbit. I think that pilots would be better represented by a larger union such as Unite but most of the right wingers (if PPrune is anything to go by) would rather take a pay cut or be boiled in oil before getting into bed with a load of lefties. Nor do I hold RYR in any great esteem, their fruit machine business model stinks.
Finally, any talk of bases being closed because MOL has thrown the teddy out of the pram should be taken with a pinch (cellar) of salt. Mr avaricous, and which CEO is not?, would be strung up by the dangly bits then spit roasted by his shareholders should he close profitable bases. Remeber the boast of RYR is that it is UK's largest airline, I think that would melt away if he closed UK bases.
Awaiting incoming.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here we go then al446, cop this for "wild speculation".
10% of the unit are union members - excludes huge numbers of pilots - but that, of course, suits BALPA.
Then if 50% + 1 of the pilots are members of the union, even if they don't want recognition, the CAC can award recognition; hardly democratic.
Then your ballot is not a foregone conclusion either, not the IF qualification.
The if it does decide a ballot is in order recognition can be declared with with 40% of the union members respond and they get a majority.
All this talks about union members, not workers.
That isn't wild speculation or a horror story: it is from the website you linked to.
As day dreamer said, BALPA want a vote among the union members, not the workers which is why more and more of the bases are having their own ballots and telling BALPA HQ to withdraw the application.
100 per cent, I still haven't had an answer to my questions from either you or BALPA HQ: cut out the flannel about dignity and respect, tell the FR pilots precisely what the improvements will be and when.
We don't need the easyJet roster; ours is better. We don't need your staff travel, ours is better. We don't need crew food, it's rubbish anyway. We have a pension scheme, we get paid for car parking, medicals, loss of licence, uniform so we don't need that.
Sufficient support (paragraph 36)
When the union refers the matter, the CAC must determine whether the union has sufficient support in the bargaining unit: the test for this is at least 10% of the proposed bargaining unit are members of the union and a majority of the proposed bargaining unit would be likely to favour recognition. A petition may count as evidence.
When the union refers the matter, the CAC must determine whether the union has sufficient support in the bargaining unit: the test for this is at least 10% of the proposed bargaining unit are members of the union and a majority of the proposed bargaining unit would be likely to favour recognition. A petition may count as evidence.
If a majority of the bargaining unit are members of the union, the CAC may issue a declaration that the union is recognised for collective bargaining. However, this is not an automatic process.
The CAC must order a ballot if it is satisfied that one of three conditions apply:
- that it is in the interests of good industrial relations to hold a ballot
-that a significant number of union members in the bargaining unit inform the CAC that they do not want recognition
-that membership evidence is produced which leads the CAC to doubt whether a significant number want recognition.
The CAC must order a ballot if it is satisfied that one of three conditions apply:
- that it is in the interests of good industrial relations to hold a ballot
-that a significant number of union members in the bargaining unit inform the CAC that they do not want recognition
-that membership evidence is produced which leads the CAC to doubt whether a significant number want recognition.
Then your ballot is not a foregone conclusion either, not the IF qualification.
To secure recognition, a union needs a vote in favour from a majority of those voting and 40% of those balloted.
All this talks about union members, not workers.
That isn't wild speculation or a horror story: it is from the website you linked to.
As day dreamer said, BALPA want a vote among the union members, not the workers which is why more and more of the bases are having their own ballots and telling BALPA HQ to withdraw the application.
100 per cent, I still haven't had an answer to my questions from either you or BALPA HQ: cut out the flannel about dignity and respect, tell the FR pilots precisely what the improvements will be and when.
We don't need the easyJet roster; ours is better. We don't need your staff travel, ours is better. We don't need crew food, it's rubbish anyway. We have a pension scheme, we get paid for car parking, medicals, loss of licence, uniform so we don't need that.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From The Real Slim Shady"
Well Slim, as a Captain (15 years plus),I pay less than £39 per month (before tax !), don't tell me you believe the £1000 quoted by the company in DOB and EW's rhetoric .......
You're so gullible ......
Vote No, retain your dignity and respect - and 1% of your salary"
You're so gullible ......
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HPP
I used to believe all that rubbish about how Balpa was there to look after its members.
It took me three years on our company council to realise that belief was a complete and utter delusion.
As I have posted before Balpa does not have the resources to deliver on promise and is only interested in headline (thus revenue) grabbing opportunities or BA CC who (despite the strident denials) still mostly control Balpas agenda.
Balpa is only as good as the support you get from the vast majority of your pilot workforce. You havent a cats chance in hell of effective collective representation through Balpa even in the unlikely event you got recognition.
The reason is that, at best, there would always be a substantial number who would toe the company line and elevate two (richly deserved) digits to Balpa.
I used to believe all that rubbish about how Balpa was there to look after its members.
It took me three years on our company council to realise that belief was a complete and utter delusion.
As I have posted before Balpa does not have the resources to deliver on promise and is only interested in headline (thus revenue) grabbing opportunities or BA CC who (despite the strident denials) still mostly control Balpas agenda.
Balpa is only as good as the support you get from the vast majority of your pilot workforce. You havent a cats chance in hell of effective collective representation through Balpa even in the unlikely event you got recognition.
The reason is that, at best, there would always be a substantial number who would toe the company line and elevate two (richly deserved) digits to Balpa.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 70
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RSS
OK, let's take it line by line
Not exactly favouring BALPA unless, of course, you have not been as persuasive as you think.
Seems fair enough to me. You wouldn't be myopic would you? Or maybe you were confused when you wrote.
Once again, seems fair enough. I didn't draw this law up and it was hardly designed by the TUC but it is what we've got. Let's do the maths.
40% of the unit means 50% on a turnout of 80%, a level that is seen only in emerging democracies, eg first full participation vote in SA, or repressive states like Zimbabwe. I would say that that is a pretty high hurdle to jump but you seem to want to set the bar higher. As I have said in an earlier post, I do not think that BRK pilots would be included, they either contract for themselves or a company other RYR. Take legal advice, I've given you the link, they are good, I've used them.
Wrong, it talks about bargaining units. That is RYR contracted pilots but I am always willing to correct my stance if your legal eagle tells you absolutely that BRK guys should be included. It would appear to me from your postings that you wish to have a bargaining unit of 1, you. Otherwise everyone, so why not drag the contract cleaners into this?
Under whose auspices are these ballots carried out? Can it be shown that undue pressure has not been exerted? It seems about as valid as witchcraft but a bit more dangerous.
If you had used the eyedrops and read my post properly you would know my stance re BALPA and, if you read my previous posts in other forums you will observe that I have consistently said that I do not work in aviation and am a Unison steward, BALPA central have never contacted me. If the vote goes for recognition then it is up to FR pilots to organise within that union, elect spokespeople and promulgate their manifesto, have it approved by the members and then put it to management. I dont know of any union who has gone into a workplace with a manifesto in place, as said, that is in the hands of the organisation you put in place. I use'you' loosely.
So we are back to the bargaining unit of 1 - you. Do all the pilots echo your view? Oh, I forgot, you had a 'ballot'.
Keep on speculating.
the test for this is at least 10% of the proposed bargaining unit are members of the union and a majority of the proposed bargaining unit would be likely to favour recognition. A petition may count as evidence.
If a majority of the bargaining unit are members of the union, the CAC may issue a declaration that the union is recognised for collective bargaining. However, this is not an automatic process.
The CAC must order a ballot if it is satisfied that one of three conditions apply:
- that it is in the interests of good industrial relations to hold a ballot
-that a significant number of union members in the bargaining unit inform the CAC that they do not want recognition
-that membership evidence is produced which leads the CAC to doubt whether a significant number want recognition.
The CAC must order a ballot if it is satisfied that one of three conditions apply:
- that it is in the interests of good industrial relations to hold a ballot
-that a significant number of union members in the bargaining unit inform the CAC that they do not want recognition
-that membership evidence is produced which leads the CAC to doubt whether a significant number want recognition.
Then if 50% + 1 of the pilots are members of the union, even if they don't want recognition, the CAC can award recognition
To secure recognition, a union needs a vote in favour from a majority of those voting and 40% of those balloted.
40% of the unit means 50% on a turnout of 80%, a level that is seen only in emerging democracies, eg first full participation vote in SA, or repressive states like Zimbabwe. I would say that that is a pretty high hurdle to jump but you seem to want to set the bar higher. As I have said in an earlier post, I do not think that BRK pilots would be included, they either contract for themselves or a company other RYR. Take legal advice, I've given you the link, they are good, I've used them.
All this talks about union members, not workers.
more of the bases are having their own ballots and telling BALPA HQ to withdraw the application.
100 per cent, I still haven't had an answer to my questions from either you or BALPA HQ: cut out the flannel about dignity and respect, tell the FR pilots precisely what the improvements will be and when.
We don't need the easyJet roster; ours is better. We don't need your staff travel, ours is better. We don't need crew food, it's rubbish anyway. We have a pension scheme, we get paid for car parking, medicals, loss of licence, uniform so we don't need that.
Keep on speculating.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Devon
Age: 46
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok a lot of people talking complete crap here.
If there is a recognition vote initiated by the CAC, it will encompass 100% of the employees at the bases concerned. Nothing to do with BALPA membership or otherewise.
BALPA provide supporting evidence to the CAC which remains totally confidential.
RYR are forced by law to provide a complete employee list, RYR and BRK at the bases, every single one of these people will then be ballotted by the CAC.
Its not complex its not rocket science and since the invention of the CAC its how its always worked.
If there is a recognition vote initiated by the CAC, it will encompass 100% of the employees at the bases concerned. Nothing to do with BALPA membership or otherewise.
BALPA provide supporting evidence to the CAC which remains totally confidential.
RYR are forced by law to provide a complete employee list, RYR and BRK at the bases, every single one of these people will then be ballotted by the CAC.
Its not complex its not rocket science and since the invention of the CAC its how its always worked.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 70
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@T668 - Define 'employee', I thought I had covered this. However, it depends on the contract that exists between RYR and BRK pilots, as individual contractors they are free to walk away any time, if that is their contract. If they are direct employees of RYR with security of tenure as recognised in law then it is a different matter. Please research.
It will not be 100% of employees but 100% of the bargaining unit, in this case qualifying pilots. It is the same for CC and engineers, hence why I think having separate unions is stupid but if you want to remain apart, remain apart.
I thought the link I posted pretty well covered it or haven't you looked there?
When it comes down to law v opinion, law wins.
PS According to a letter I read from a rocket scientist in that scurrilous leftie rag "The Guardian", rocket science is quite easy, stuff propelant in tube, point at sky, light it and stand back. Control is the hard bit.
It will not be 100% of employees but 100% of the bargaining unit, in this case qualifying pilots. It is the same for CC and engineers, hence why I think having separate unions is stupid but if you want to remain apart, remain apart.
I thought the link I posted pretty well covered it or haven't you looked there?
When it comes down to law v opinion, law wins.
PS According to a letter I read from a rocket scientist in that scurrilous leftie rag "The Guardian", rocket science is quite easy, stuff propelant in tube, point at sky, light it and stand back. Control is the hard bit.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: england
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I correct in saying the bargaining unit is yet to be decided? As far as Im aware both the union and Ryanair have to put forward their case to the CAC regarding who they feel the bargaining unit consists of, as was the case in 2001? Ryanair/Balpa may well state that BRK pilots should be included if it would help either of their case. Please correct me if Im wrong.
Now onto a slightly different matter. Surely if the CAC have petitions from various bases (currently 5/10) where the majority of WORKERS, not just Balpa members, have voted against recognition, this MUST be taken into account? Could the CAC say recognition cannot apply at those bases?
Again, please correct me if I am wrong but if the majority of the pilots at various bases are voting against it and recognition somehow goes through, Balpa are effectively forcing themselves into bases that have categorically stated they do not want them. Is this not a tad hypocitical in that one of Balpas arguments is that we (the pilots) let FR management force their will on us?
I AM NOT TRYING TO START ANOTHER PRO/ANTI BALPA ARGUEMENT! So please no arsey comments, just informed replies... cheers
Now onto a slightly different matter. Surely if the CAC have petitions from various bases (currently 5/10) where the majority of WORKERS, not just Balpa members, have voted against recognition, this MUST be taken into account? Could the CAC say recognition cannot apply at those bases?
Again, please correct me if I am wrong but if the majority of the pilots at various bases are voting against it and recognition somehow goes through, Balpa are effectively forcing themselves into bases that have categorically stated they do not want them. Is this not a tad hypocitical in that one of Balpas arguments is that we (the pilots) let FR management force their will on us?
I AM NOT TRYING TO START ANOTHER PRO/ANTI BALPA ARGUEMENT! So please no arsey comments, just informed replies... cheers
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 70
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CommandB
Good questions. To reply to your last point first, hopefully I am not being arsey on here and I am with you on the pro/anti thing, I have stated my stance, or lack of, previously.
You may be correct re the bargaining unit, I have not read the full law, only precis, but suspect that it is direct RYR contract only. Brookfield are a contracting company, it says so on their website Brookfield Aviation - Providing Human Resource Solutions Worldwide
and as such they may withdraw from RYR at any time. At our place we have agency staff of equal responsibility status but they have no place within our industrial relations. That is why I advised RSS to go see a lawyer and meant it. If BRK guys are in dispute they are in dispute with BRK not RYR.
As far as I am aware there is no provision in UK law to vote against anything, only for. Unless it is a referendum. Hence -
That is why BALPA are running a petition on their website and requiring details be posted in confidence so that CAC can prove its voracity which is not true of the workplace 'ballots' being discussed on here.
You mention 5 of 10 bases having voted against. Leaving aside its validity (see above), if that translates into a majority of the bargaining unit, which takes us back to point 1 re composition of such, and they are not BRK then all is well and good for the anti camp and RSS may retain his dummy in his pram. If the results do not accurately reflect the intentions of 50% + 1 then the dummy gets airborn and it would trigger a ballot. Recognition, if won, would be accross the company and not on a base by base basis, it doesn't work like that in UK. There would be no hypocracy involved as 50% + 1 of the bargaining unit would have voted for it of their own free will.
Hope this helps.
You may be correct re the bargaining unit, I have not read the full law, only precis, but suspect that it is direct RYR contract only. Brookfield are a contracting company, it says so on their website Brookfield Aviation - Providing Human Resource Solutions Worldwide
and as such they may withdraw from RYR at any time. At our place we have agency staff of equal responsibility status but they have no place within our industrial relations. That is why I advised RSS to go see a lawyer and meant it. If BRK guys are in dispute they are in dispute with BRK not RYR.
As far as I am aware there is no provision in UK law to vote against anything, only for. Unless it is a referendum. Hence -
the test for this is at least 10% of the proposed bargaining unit are members of the union and a majority of the proposed bargaining unit would be likely to favour recognition. A petition may count as evidence.
You mention 5 of 10 bases having voted against. Leaving aside its validity (see above), if that translates into a majority of the bargaining unit, which takes us back to point 1 re composition of such, and they are not BRK then all is well and good for the anti camp and RSS may retain his dummy in his pram. If the results do not accurately reflect the intentions of 50% + 1 then the dummy gets airborn and it would trigger a ballot. Recognition, if won, would be accross the company and not on a base by base basis, it doesn't work like that in UK. There would be no hypocracy involved as 50% + 1 of the bargaining unit would have voted for it of their own free will.
Hope this helps.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Essex
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I can see, the only democratic way to deal with this now is the ballot.
The people who don't want recognition, either turn up and vote no or don't turn up. Those that do, then turn up and vote yes.
Its the only way that I can see a majority opinion at each base winning now.
If FR are confident that the pilots are happy with the current direct negotiation system, they should have nothing to fear. If BALPA think that enough people want recognition then they have nothing to fear.
Edited to say that either way I think the pilots are pretty screwed. If BALPA win then the next period will be fairly grim as FR follow through on their threats. If they don't, then when winter comes, FR have carte blanche to make cuts where they like. Either way it seems to me they lose.
The people who don't want recognition, either turn up and vote no or don't turn up. Those that do, then turn up and vote yes.
Its the only way that I can see a majority opinion at each base winning now.
If FR are confident that the pilots are happy with the current direct negotiation system, they should have nothing to fear. If BALPA think that enough people want recognition then they have nothing to fear.
Edited to say that either way I think the pilots are pretty screwed. If BALPA win then the next period will be fairly grim as FR follow through on their threats. If they don't, then when winter comes, FR have carte blanche to make cuts where they like. Either way it seems to me they lose.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: next to sidestick
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edited to say that either way I think the pilots are pretty screwed. If BALPA win then the next period will be fairly grim as FR follow through on their threats. If they don't, then when winter comes, FR have carte blanche to make cuts where they like. Either way it seems to me they lose.
tricky.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 70
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To last 3 posts -
Please see one of my previous posts as to why I don't think so. There is a great of hot air being spouted on this thread, and I don't mean you guys. Remember MOL has a board to answer to and his decisions have to be justifiable, in commercial terms. He also has quite a shareholding which he will not want see go down the Swanee. For the moment my advice would be to do nothing. I will explain tomorrow, it is too late now.
If BALPA win then the next period will be fairly grim as FR follow through on their threats.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: right behind you
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
management pilots in union
Question:If being in a union is such a bad thing andso career threatening,as some would have us believe, in ryanair.Why is it that all bar one of the senior pilot post including the head of training and chief pilot in ryanair are members of the Irish Airline Pilots Association?
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 70
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To explain my earlier post -
The only body that can push for a ballot, providing they can demonstrate support, is BALPA, AFAIK FR can't request one. By virtue of BALPA running the petition on their site they already have 10% membership, would be pointless otherwise, but short of 50%. If I were making the decision I would not push for the ballot until I had 60%+ to allow for drop outs and company lickspittles giving support then voting against in the ballot. Clearly BALPA is not there yet but MOL has no idea how close. The best way he could ensure that the number is reached is to treat his pilots like sh*t and see them log on. MOL would lose and what he has feared will come to pass. In short he's got to be nice to you but you know the mask will slip so BALPA will quietly dig away and gain support (or not) awaiting the economic upturn. I make no prediction on that one. Come the upturn, come the demands for more moolah and the campaign re-emerges.
For FR it is also good, they can run the business without having to look over their shoulder to see if BALPA is sneaking up on them, something I think they are bothered about otherwise the company placemen and brown noses would not be all over threads like this like a rash. FR also also has to keep you guys happy with an eye to the upturn as most of the BRK guys who are building hours will be off to secure pastures new & better T&Cs. The only flaw I can think of is that MOL plans to be gone by upturn so will be spiteful but, as posted before, he is answerable to a board who may remove him before he goes too far.
In my view MOL & friends are being short sighted and probably have a very 60s and 70s viewpoint of a bunch of nutters who call each other 'brother' and 'comrade' and would strike at the drop of a hat. He is wrong. Sir John Harvey Jones invited the unions in when he became chairman of ICI saying that if unions had not been invented the employers would have had to do so. He was right and ICI became a far better company on all measurable standards as opposed to when it only had staff associations. He would find that in representing the best interest of the pilots they also do so for the company and its success. In certai cases their is more management knowledge and experience in a union than there is in the company, that is why I think BALPA would be better off as part of Unite but that is up to you guys.
The only body that can push for a ballot, providing they can demonstrate support, is BALPA, AFAIK FR can't request one. By virtue of BALPA running the petition on their site they already have 10% membership, would be pointless otherwise, but short of 50%. If I were making the decision I would not push for the ballot until I had 60%+ to allow for drop outs and company lickspittles giving support then voting against in the ballot. Clearly BALPA is not there yet but MOL has no idea how close. The best way he could ensure that the number is reached is to treat his pilots like sh*t and see them log on. MOL would lose and what he has feared will come to pass. In short he's got to be nice to you but you know the mask will slip so BALPA will quietly dig away and gain support (or not) awaiting the economic upturn. I make no prediction on that one. Come the upturn, come the demands for more moolah and the campaign re-emerges.
For FR it is also good, they can run the business without having to look over their shoulder to see if BALPA is sneaking up on them, something I think they are bothered about otherwise the company placemen and brown noses would not be all over threads like this like a rash. FR also also has to keep you guys happy with an eye to the upturn as most of the BRK guys who are building hours will be off to secure pastures new & better T&Cs. The only flaw I can think of is that MOL plans to be gone by upturn so will be spiteful but, as posted before, he is answerable to a board who may remove him before he goes too far.
In my view MOL & friends are being short sighted and probably have a very 60s and 70s viewpoint of a bunch of nutters who call each other 'brother' and 'comrade' and would strike at the drop of a hat. He is wrong. Sir John Harvey Jones invited the unions in when he became chairman of ICI saying that if unions had not been invented the employers would have had to do so. He was right and ICI became a far better company on all measurable standards as opposed to when it only had staff associations. He would find that in representing the best interest of the pilots they also do so for the company and its success. In certai cases their is more management knowledge and experience in a union than there is in the company, that is why I think BALPA would be better off as part of Unite but that is up to you guys.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry guys, I had a problem with the power supply to my lapatop and had to conserve the battery until the replacement arrived.
So to respond in some sort of sequence:
aldente
And you are so poorly paid if as a 15 yr Captain you are making less than the FO I flew with yesterday!! £3900 a month......are you kidding me?? Of course you are probably a turboprop Captain in a BALPA airline.
al446
And if you had taken the eyedrops you would have NB'd that the comment was directed at 100%- hundredpercent- not you. DOH!!!!
There is no point in arguing the toss over the interpretation of an Act of Parliament:when the case is ventilated before a Judge, or the CAC, it matters not how you, pushing your lacklustre case for Unite, or me, pushing my case for rejection of the BALPA application, care to trade arguments, but how the Court or Legislature interprets and applies the law.
Firstly, for someone who isn't a pilot, isn't a Ryanair pilot, and probably doesn't harbour an interest in becoming one, you have a great deal to say on an issue that you have no influence on. My bargaining unit was, if you had taken the time to read my earlier posts, always the BRK and RYR contract pilots: since the issue of recognition poses a massive question to the security of everyone's job, it strikes me as being just that the BRK should have a say too.
Are you completely delusional? The pilots organised their own in house ballots to determine whether or not they want BALPA to proceed with the application for their base; remember the BALPA spread bet, by applying individually for the 10 UK bases? Are you seriously suggesting that they do not have the right to express an opinion? Are you seriously suggesting that yo and your union lackeys are the only individuals blessed with the integrity to conduct a ballot? Are you denying the pilots the right to express an opinion?
It matters not on here whether I represent the views of my guinea pig, cat or hamster. What matters is that the majority of pilots expressed a preference for BALPA to withdraw their application: simples!
t66
Not quite me old: the legislation talks about union members, not workers. The first stages, which ca result in recognition, only deals with union members.
commandB
Regrettably not: the only solution is a Judicial Review.
Dim Repa
Being a union member and recognition are different issues.
So to respond in some sort of sequence:
aldente
Well Slim, as a Captain (15 years plus),I pay less than £39 per month (before tax !), don't tell me you believe the £1000 quoted by the company in DOB and EW's rhetoric .......
You're so gullible ......
You're so gullible ......
al446
If you had used the eyedrops and read my post properly you would know my stance re BALPA and, if you read my previous posts in other forums you will observe that I have consistently said that I do not work in aviation and am a Unison steward, BALPA central have never contacted me. If the vote goes for recognition then it is up to FR pilots to organise within that union, elect spokespeople and promulgate their manifesto, have it approved by the members and then put it to management. I dont know of any union who has gone into a workplace with a manifesto in place, as said, that is in the hands of the organisation you put in place. I use'you' loosely.
There is no point in arguing the toss over the interpretation of an Act of Parliament:when the case is ventilated before a Judge, or the CAC, it matters not how you, pushing your lacklustre case for Unite, or me, pushing my case for rejection of the BALPA application, care to trade arguments, but how the Court or Legislature interprets and applies the law.
So we are back to the bargaining unit of 1 - you. Do all the pilots echo your view? Oh, I forgot, you had a 'ballot'.
Under whose auspices are these ballots carried out? Can it be shown that undue pressure has not been exerted? It seems about as valid as witchcraft but a bit more dangerous.
So we are back to the bargaining unit of 1 - you. Do all the pilots echo your view? Oh, I forgot, you had a 'ballot'.
t66
If there is a recognition vote initiated by the CAC, it will encompass 100% of the employees at the bases concerned. Nothing to do with BALPA membership or otherewise
commandB
Now onto a slightly different matter. Surely if the CAC have petitions from various bases (currently 5/10) where the majority of WORKERS, not just Balpa members, have voted against recognition, this MUST be taken into account? Could the CAC say recognition cannot apply at those bases?
Dim Repa
Question:If being in a union is such a bad thing andso career threatening,as some would have us believe, in ryanair.Why is it that all bar one of the senior pilot post including the head of training and chief pilot in ryanair are members of the Irish Airline Pilots Association?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From The Real Slim Shady
aldente
Slim, stop being such a jerk !!! I am actually a RYR Captain, on a permanent contract, STN based and over 5 years with the company.
My P60 showed a gross pay of just over £90,000 for the tax year 2008/9, my take home pay most month's is over £5000, yet I still only pay £39 per month to BALPA before tax.
PM me with an e-mail address and I'll send you a copy of my bank statement to prove it !
Money well spent I say ......
aldente
Quote:
Well Slim, as a Captain (15 years plus),I pay less than £39 per month (before tax !), don't tell me you believe the £1000 quoted by the company in DOB and EW's rhetoric .......
You're so gullible ......
And you are so poorly paid if as a 15 yr Captain you are making less than the FO I flew with yesterday!! £3900 a month......are you kidding me?? Of course you are probably a turboprop Captain in a BALPA airline.
Well Slim, as a Captain (15 years plus),I pay less than £39 per month (before tax !), don't tell me you believe the £1000 quoted by the company in DOB and EW's rhetoric .......
You're so gullible ......
And you are so poorly paid if as a 15 yr Captain you are making less than the FO I flew with yesterday!! £3900 a month......are you kidding me?? Of course you are probably a turboprop Captain in a BALPA airline.
Slim, stop being such a jerk !!! I am actually a RYR Captain, on a permanent contract, STN based and over 5 years with the company.
My P60 showed a gross pay of just over £90,000 for the tax year 2008/9, my take home pay most month's is over £5000, yet I still only pay £39 per month to BALPA before tax.
PM me with an e-mail address and I'll send you a copy of my bank statement to prove it !
Money well spent I say ......
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies if this has already been posted:
Ryanair cricket protest : Stansted Airport News Stories
Ryanair cricket protest
13.07.09
The final day of the first Ashes Test at Cardiff was interrupted by a pitch invasion involving two protesters campaigning against the recruitment policies of Ryanair. John Foley and Anthony Lea took to the field during the 51st over, brandishing a banner decrying the budget airline for charging recruits for training, only to terminate their contracts.
Mr Foley halted play for several minutes while he was wrestled to the ground by four security guards, while Mr Lea broke the stumps at Cathedral Road End before he too was apprehended. Speaking after he was removed from the stadium, Mr Foley, 43, said the protest had been planned the previous evening after Ryanair terminated the employment contract of his daughter
Ryanair cricket protest : Stansted Airport News Stories
Ryanair cricket protest
13.07.09
The final day of the first Ashes Test at Cardiff was interrupted by a pitch invasion involving two protesters campaigning against the recruitment policies of Ryanair. John Foley and Anthony Lea took to the field during the 51st over, brandishing a banner decrying the budget airline for charging recruits for training, only to terminate their contracts.
Mr Foley halted play for several minutes while he was wrestled to the ground by four security guards, while Mr Lea broke the stumps at Cathedral Road End before he too was apprehended. Speaking after he was removed from the stadium, Mr Foley, 43, said the protest had been planned the previous evening after Ryanair terminated the employment contract of his daughter