Astraeus A320 Contracts

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

aztruk - you have not understood the argument. This is nothing to do with supply and demand. Your company is not somehow offering a better service to the public at a cheaper rate and is therefore doing well. Astraeus are providing non-unionised labour to defeat unionised labour within another company. Whether or not individual pilots at Astraeus are BALPA members or not is irrelevant - they are being herded together as individuals to break a union in another company. You are simply strike-breakers brought in before the strike begins. I agree that ultimately market forces determine salaries. Within the range of available employers I would rank Astraeus as scraping the bottom of the barrel, but that is not the issue here - as it happens Astraeus pay rock-bottom wages, but that is neither here nor there in assessing this particular situation. There are all sorts of companies out there with all sorts of different terms and conditions. I have no problem with that - I personally like working for easyJet and at this juncture intend to work for them for years to come. Similarly I recognise that working for BA 'man and boy' has brought fantastic opportunities to many pilots - I have no envy whatsover of those fortunate enough to have spent their working lives in such a good environment. Nor do I have a problem when 55 year-old pilots leave there and continue to work for easyJet et al afterwards - that is entirely reasonable. The real issue in this particular case is that this is not competition between companies in the accepted sense. This is not BA against Ryanair or Aer Lingus against easyJet. This is Aer Lingus management acting against their pilot employees and trying to circumvent their problems with the Irish pilots' union. Astraeus pilots have unwittingly become 'scab' labour to coin a rather unfortunate phrase from the past. I fully accept that the pilots at Astraeus, including those taking the A320 jobs initially did not know what was happening due to the secrecy surrounding the contract. Nonetheless, the truth is out there now and this contract must be challenged both here and, far more importantly, by the Aer Lingus pilots themselves. I am simply at a loss to understand why they are not doing so. Whether you are a parent with your kids, a Prime Minister with other nations or an employee with his bosses, the secret in life is to know which battles to fight and which ones to leave for another day. I would say this to all Aer Lingus pilots - this is a battle you simply have to fight, and fight now. You are watching the systematic destruction of your entire futures by a gang of self-serving losers who masquerade as your managers. They are aided and abetted by a two-bit company without scruples of any kind. Not surprisingly their employees are puting up a smoke screen of abuse towards myself and others who have challenged what is happening - they cannot hide the truth of what is going on here and nor should they be allowed to do so.

Rainboe - not surprisingly you are avoiding the issue. First of all, the competition between bona-fide companies such as BA and easyJet is one thing. No reasonable person has a problem with that. Secondly, low-cost carriers like easyJet and Ryanair have undeniably created a market that previously did not exist. BA have never made money on short-haul - their profit has historically been achieved from business/first class transatlantic travel. Their passengers figures around Europe are not that far below their historical norms - companies like easyJet and Ryanair have indeed taken some of their client base, but have primarily carved a niche market. Once again, I need to state that I have no problem with fair competition between companies - that is a founding stone of our free market economy. As one of the numerous checks and balances in life, I also see the need for responsible trade union representation of employees to prevent the enrichment of the few at the expense of the many. I always hated the union excesses of the 70s but I have also come to despise corporate greed, which covers up personal greed verging on criminality among the directors of large companies. That is the true force behind all this - the common interests of a few very senior managers at Astraeus and Aer Lingus coming together in a union of the unsavoury against a multitude of the unwary. To an extent I do not blame you for creating such a fuss here. Partly it is your nature, and partly it is because you have been weighed in the balance and found wanting. Even you, as the great Astraeus protagonist, have have been unwilling to discuss the issue of union-busting - who could blame you as it is the elephant in the living room of your conduct. You can try and tip-toe around it and you can throw insults at me until the cows come home. The problem is that the elephant is sat right in front of you, and you choose to ignore it. The simple fact is you are knowingly and proudly taking part in an unwholesome act of destroying the power of the Aer Lingus pilots' union. I hope the pilots at Aer Lingus will arouse from their sleep walking pretty sharpish or they will be in dire straits. The 50 or so pilot jobs your company is 'creating' is about to be offset by the 100 or so jobs lost at Aer Lingus. But then again who cares - look after number one, right?

[Flyingstig]

Lets assume that NSF is right. I`m sure that will lower his blood pressure a notch or two for a start!

In his ideal world Aer Lingus would have approached Astraeus with a proposal. The latter would have said "No we cant do that its not nice! We would rather turn business away at this time of boom and expansion."
So AL goes elsewhere. Again the reply is no because the most important thing in business is doing whats right!

OK, So now what do AL do? Sure, the disastrous state they are in is, to a large extent, the result of mismanagement. It is also the result of a uniquely Irish political malaise that goes back many years. Cronyism has caused untold damage in ROI. The power of the unions (unchecked, and sometimes exploited, by politicians) has also played its part. The pilots union being one of them.
My understanding is that the AL pilots at BFS and LGW are on different contracts to `mainline` anyway. Did the union stop this? Did the senior pilots, confident that it would never affect them, step in and say "No you cant do that its not right!?" No they went on fighting to shore up their massive pensions and salaries (bigger than your BA nemesis Norm!).

So the struggle goes on. The new CEO who is not at all prone to the previous ploitical problems is unable to move forward to try and save the company. In the end it can no longer continue to trade. Guess what, the LGW AL operation ceases and lo and behold NSF is standing there going "Yeah! Great ! another victory for the Lo Cost operator! We won again!
How many pilots are now out of work? (not counting the ones who would have joined Astraeus!)

Of course, while all this was going on, those pilots who would have joined Astraeus because they needed to put a crust on the table, (apparently there are no `fat cat BA` retirees amongst them!) are standing by and applauding, because every one did the `right thing`. Yeah!

Fast forward to the next airline facing collapse (there will be one!). The management say "Thank heavens we had the chance to see what happened to AL. We wont make the same mistake of putting survival ahead of pilot Ts&Cs!" etc etc etc.
Hang on here comes an EasyAmbulance to pick up the pieces and profit from it!

[Lord Lardy]

Somehow AL pilots maintained their elevated pay status in the face of realism considering their business model and their returns.

The cost base in LGW and BFS is exactly where Aer Lingus management want it. They have publically admitted it. You are talking out of your you know what. 100 pilots are set to lost their jobs in other Aer Lingus bases. In the bases that your company will be operating out of current Aer Lingus pilots are being rostered to sit at home. Out of these 100 pilots set to lose their jobs you guessed it 100 of them have applied for transfer to both Belfast and Gatwick on the company accepted local terms and conditions in anticipation of the expansion being promised. So Rainboe let me get this straight. As a 'proud' BALPA member you are telling us that you are happy to fly an Aer Lingus aircraft with the company's own colour scheme but now dry leased to your company with the full knowledge that by doing so you are taking someone else's legitimate job in their own company without the company ever engaging in any consultation with the individual asking them if they would be willing to reduce their cost to the company? You're a 'proud' BALPA member my arse.

Aer Lingus have NO routes out of the UK that require them to use your company at this present time. The use of your company at this present time is an additional cost to Aer Lingus, not a saving as they are still required to pay your company for it's services whilst at the same time pay it's own pilots to sit at home. To add further ammunition to this whole plan they now face paying a potential hefty redundancy package to the pilots it wants to let go, even though there is work for them at the company acknowledged and accepted cost base. A question was asked of Aer Lingus management as to how much this would save the company. The answer - "We don't have this information to hand". Aer Lingus have had ample time to apply for this UK AOC ever since this plan was devised in early April in anticipation for future expansion next summer and have failed to do so. Using this mickey mouse type airline/operation is nothing short of an attack on pilot unions and the industry as a whole around Europe. If you can't see that then your level of intellect is surpisingly low. However I suspect that the picture of the queen on a piece of crusted paper is all you're interested in. My surprise is that the Irish Government as 25% shareholders haven't stepped in to put a stop to this situation. They still have three weeks to do so. For them to stand back as a share holder in the company and allow legitimate employees of a company be forced onto the increasing social welfare burden at a time when they are offering to reduce their cost to the level publically acknowledged by the company as being satisfactory is beyond me. My only reasonable explanation as to why they haven't stepped in thus far is simply a case of they haven't been properly informed of the 'true' picture as to what is going on.

Don't get me wrong. I never have nor never will wish any professional pilot to be out of work and I extend this good will to our greatest competitors. However if this goes where I think it will go then the additional losers out of this will be your colleagues and in particular the captains who have been recruited exclusively for this operation. The Dry Leasing of the Aer Lingus aircraft will end in a few months, your company's management will have made a generous amount of money out of it but the reality now will be that Aer Lingus now have it's own UK AOC and will then use it's own pilots to crew the expansion. What position will your one year contract colleagues be left in then? I suspect you don't really care. Your now out of work contract colleagues will end up applying to Aer Lingus, just to keep their 'local' job. They'll be lucky! I can't see there being that many Airbus jobs in the UK for them for the forseeable future with your company. Bear in mind that Aer Lingus management agreed and signed in clear black and white only a few months ago an agreed global seniority list with all it's pilots after an exhaustive process stating that no DEC captains would be recruited in any current or future base until all internal applications have been exhausted. Where will your colleagues stand then? To put it in perspective approx 70% of the current pilot body in Aer Lingus are eligible for command positions right now such is the experience level in the company. This will only increase as the months progress. I think it paints a bit of realism on the future command positions on offer.

[stansdead]

Rainboe,

What is good for the Goose, is good for the Gander.

Will you be reducing your salary to the new "industry standard terms and conditions"?

Will you be happy when AEU management reduce your salary, without consultation, to meet the new "industry standard terms and conditions"?

This will be the next event (believe me), as AEU management will use just the excuse you use (viability) to reduce your pay by bleating that:

times are tough;
margins are wafer thin;
fuel is rising etc etc....

I would be very, very concerned that YOUR management will be attacking your pay next. After all, if they will get involved in the unsavoury business of other people's problems they will most happily trample on your heads in AEU without pausing for breath.

The issue here is most definitely union busting, and if you've been a BALPA member since 1971 whilst working for BA and accruing a nice, fat APS pension, I would do one of two things, either:

a) keep your head down and stay out of a discussion that morally you can't win;

or

b) put your backbone in and admit what is happening is wrong.

You may not like NSF, his ideas or comments, but he is right on this. You are advocating busting a union, and that is shameful. Especially from a senior member of our community.

Finally, to use the argument that easyjet took BA pilot jobs is nonsense (or harmed BA at all for that matter). easyjet and Ryanair et al created a new market. The numbers of people flying in Europe now is many times greater than when easyjet started with 2 leased B732's.

The argument is a complete whitewash.

Anyway, over to you guys to try and defend the shameful tactic of union busting.

[PilotsOfTheCaribbean]

As entertaining as some of the name calling is, if you take away the emotion and the search for the highest piece of ground to plant the morality flag on, you are left with the three basic tenets of a marketplace. Supply, demand and regulation. Any commercial entity has to set the price of its product in accordance with the influence these three things have on its business. A business will only ever survive on its own, if it can turn a profit. If it consistently fails to do this it dies. Business, just as life, is all about survival.

Fish in a pond will live quite happily with each other as long as there is a plentiful supply of food. Some of the fish will get bigger and greedier, some will inevitably fall by the wayside. However once the food supply starts to dry up the fish will become much more predatory in nature in order to survive. The big fish will eat the little fish. Some of the little fish will adapt their size advantage to survive in the niches that the big fish cannot reach. Then the older and weaker big fish become vulnerable to the younger and fitter big fish. Some of the smaller ones are still surviving by the food that drops from these feeding frenzies into their own niches.

Regulation comes in the form of the pond keeper who manages the pond so that there is sufficient variety and control to keep the balance healthy.

Airlines and particularly aggressive new airlines see regulation as a restriction that significantly raises their input costs. Fuel is one of the most regulated and distorted markets that has ever been created. Many of the other input costs are also subject to regulatory control. This means finding cost reductions wherever the opportunity arises. Labour is one of the major input costs. As airline flying was always generally seen as the pinnacle of the aviation industry as far as as pilots were generally concerned, and indeed still is, it could afford to be selective and demanding in the type of recruits it would appoint. Salaries reflected the levels of experience required. For the largest carriers virtually all of their input came from either the military or from other airlines. There was a market that pilots utilized to achieve their aspirations. Certainly there was the "Hamble factor" but that was a highly selective full sponsorship programme that provided a limited input to 2 previous state owned carriers. On top of this the market was to some extent regulated by the unions themselves who sought to set a standard that would ensure a good market price for their members and the industry generally.

Over the last 10-15 years the "Hamble factor" has been exploited by commercial organistations by virtue of the fact it exists to be exploited. Schools sprang up with tie ins to specific airlines, providing them with a low cost low experience to fill the right seat. That was later expanded to turn much of this industry into a factory, where applicants paid huge sums of cash to buy their basic licence coupled with a qualified promise of an airline pilots job at the end of it. Now half of the flight deck labour cost had been significantly reduced, eliminated or even reversed into a profit centre. The regulator did nothing, so that market flourished.

On the other side of the flight deck, mandatory retirement ages were raised from 55 to 60 and then on to 65. Pilots set to retire on healthy pensions, could now do so safe in the knowledge that they could boost their own income well beyond anything ever envisaged by either taking a job at another airline or indeed staying put at their own. Some airlines saw this as an opportunity to reduce their own labour cost base, since the addition of these reduced sums was still a huge boost to the individuals own income. You certainly can't blame individuals for taking full advantage of the opportunites this afforded any more than you can blame the companies who sought commercial advantage by the practice.

The problem here is that the market needs better regulation to ensure that the right hand seat is not filled with 200 hour pilots buying a vanity publishing lifestyle for themselves. Likewise it worries senior pilots who seek to protect their own terms and conditions when their own demand is being eroded by part time second income pilots and those for whom the industry is more of a hobby than a primary source of income.

If an airline can satisfy its own demand by offering say 20K for a Captain and 10K for a First Officer then unfortunetaly by definition that becomes the market rate. Others will either have to match it, or operate at a labour cost disadvantage. Once matched the advantage is lost, and some method will need to be sought to again reduce costs.

Regulation to require airline First Officers operating an aircraft over a certain weight needs to be introduced that sets a miminum experience level of a full ATPL and 1500 hours. You can add to that whatever you deem necessary by way of additional training or courses to achieve the required standard. What it does however is remove a huge chunk of the "vanity publishing" market that many airlines are now capitalising on. As for over 55's working on with pension income as a buffer, that arose as a result of legislative changes and naturally people would take advantage of it wherever they could. Over the course of the next 10 years or so the effects of that will naturally disappear.

I am sorry that I have gone on a bit, but it is only to lend colour to the picture. In summary the Supply and demand factors are still what sets the market price of our labour. It is the regulation that has been allowed to evaporate enabling the distortions that are now evident in the whole industry. Unfortunetaly I expect it is going to get a lot worse before it improves, and that improvement may be a long time coming.

[JW411]

PilotsOfTheCaribbean:

Well, I didn't think your post was too long and, although I don't agree with 100% of what you have said, I certainly agree with most of it.

We pilots are forever being encouraged to join BALPA, ALPA etc "for that is the only way we can be united and forever succeed" and here we have a classic example of experienced BALPA members who not only cannot agree but are quite prepared to tear lumps out of one another. (I think I might just recognise an elephant if it were to be found grazing in my lounge).

P.S. In the interests of accuracy ladies and gentlemen, the expression is:

"What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander".

[skypilot320]

Hi every one

I'm A320 F/O job hunting,any suggestions please?

Thanks

[Company Message]

Yep, avoid Astraeus if you possibly can.

I did hear that Mario isn't as unpopular as he once was - last week somebody touched him with a bargepole...

[Old King Coal]

Aw come on, Mario's a good bloke imho (and, before he became deskbound, he was a fine pilot and an even better instructor!).

Fwiw, I moved on from Astraeus about 18 months ago, but I'll admit to moments when I do miss it.
Astraeus gave me some of the best training and most interesting flying experiences & destinations that I have ever had, and probably ever will ever have. and to my reckoning they are the 'last man standing' in terms of airlines with a resident HQ at LGW.

Ok, it might not be the best salary in aviation, but it is a fun & close-knit little company, one that has met the salary payment every month since starting in 2002. Many big airlines are laying crews off, but Astraeus is recruiting. Also, and by all accounts, they're maybe set to make a modest profit too; and that, in this economic climate, speaks volumes for the talents of people like MF, SM, RB, and JM, et al.

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

Rainboe - I have no doubt you have been a proud BALPA member since 1971. After all they won you a fantastic career - no doubt you backed them 100% during your time at BA. Now you have had to depart, it would be churlish to hold the line with such strong views as before - time moves on etc. I don't imagine there was much talk of 'market forces' during your time at BA - it was all about maintaining the hard won deals against unscrupulous management. Who would have believed it how time changes? Unscrupulous management are now in fact the voice of the future against pilot intransigence. Stuff all the old union boys back on the Emerald Isle - they are living in yesteryear after all. Always best to break up uhealthy union monopolies don't you think? None worse than Aer Lingus I hear. Some of them actually want to discuss their futures rather than have their lives dictated to them - whatever next? Fortunately a great solution has been found - bring in a two-bit company from the UK to take on the work of the first company in Ireland at a fraction of the price, sack the pilots from the first company and give the people who thought it up a big bonus. As for all that nasty orange trash who seem to fill the whole of Gatwick these days, their days are numbered. Once you have pilots working for pin money you can then take on those ghastly people who dared to offload you from a flight last year because they were overbooked. It is just so clever - pay desperate First Officers a pittance because they need experience and work. Then recruit Captains with big pensions from previous lives who really only need pocket money and you are away. You can then provide cheap labour for some Irish company to face down their unions. It is just so clever and really is win, win for everyone who matters - principally yourself.

Fortunately, the word on the street is that 'market forces' in the form of the Irish unions are about to involve themselves in a big way with the Astraeus contract - not a moment too soon in my view. Any union who lets this deal go unchallenged is not worthy of the name. The testimony of history is that pilots are foolish people when it comes to standing up and being counted. It may be that they are about to buck the trend - I certainly hope so.

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

Rainboe - the subject is 'Astraeus A320 Contracts' and that is what is being discussed. Like numerous people who like to give abuse, you do not like to hear an alternative view to yours. I am open to any reasoned discussion on this subject, but at this stage I am still convinced that this is a union-destroying contract and all that goes with it.

Regarding the ex-BA Captains in easyJet, they are, to a man, outstanding individuals who enjoy the universal respect of everyone they fly with. They are professional, competent and a delight to fly with. They have been a huge asset to easyJet and are a pleasure to have on board. The key thing is that they are working for a company that has brought massive employment to the industry and, along with Ryanair, have generated a whole new market that did not previously exist. Included among that list of benefits to the industry as a whole has been the opportunity to provide employment to retired pilots from legacy carriers such as BA. Their contribution to easyJet has been, and continues to be, immense.

My sole beef with the Astraeus A320 contract, as opposed to any other aspect of Astraeus, is that this contract is effectively an internal battle within Aer Lingus and the Astraeus pilots are being used as pawns in a power-broking game to break the hold of the Irish unions on the company. That behaviour has to be challenged and made public. Aer Lingus are our competitors and on the surface of things it is somewhat bizarre I should be defending the opposition. Nonetheless as a pilot with a vested interest in the future of our industry, it seems entirely reasonable that I should draw to the attention of my fellow professionals the real situation here. However unapalatable that may be to Rainboe and others, that is how I see it. I am completely open to any rational discussion that refutes my current take on this contract. The fact that the discussion has gone where it has is a reflection of the issues at stake.

Anyway, I have said my bit here and will head off for a while to other matters. I sincerely hope that somewhere out there on the internet are some Aer Lingus pilots who are willing to contribute to this debate. Ultimately this is your problem and not mine. To sit back now and ignore what is happening is professional suicide. I trust you will not be intimidated by your own management into fiddling while Rome burns.

[Lord Lardy]

The sole reason Astreaus is offering contract A320 jobs is to replace the legitimate jobs by Aer Lingus pilots soon to be made redundant having had no consultation or engagement from the company.

Norman, do not take the assumed silence on this and other websites as being a case of this being accepted by the Aer Lingus pilot body. These websites in the past and certainly in the future are not the place Aer Lingus pilots argue an internal issue. What I can assure you is that what is happening is not going unnoticed. What I can also tell you is that the new Aer Lingus CEO is not a foolish man and this plan devised by others in the company before he joined does not appear to be having the effect they had sought. The brand and safety record of the company rests on his head and he has acknowledged this to the pilot body. It may prove another very expensive mistake by his subordinate management who I can only assume thought all Aer Lingus pilots would be very shortly threatening strike action and who aren't. All I can say is watch this space. There may be a few twists and turns to come yet.

[Doug the Head]

Huh?

Norman, I understand your argument about the union busting tactics and how this can undermine a union, but, what I don't get is how you can be so soft against your own employer (hardly angels when it comes to screwing their employees, just ask SXF pilots about their local contract... ) and suddenly act so harsh against another company...

When EZY undercuts the majors by offering TRSS and cadet schemes (i.e. lousy deals) it's "market forces" and "creating employment" but when Astraeus undercuts EZY then you suddenly cry faul? It's a bit of a double standard don't you think? Do you have an axe to grind with Astraeus, or a just soft spot (management @sskissing?) for EZY?

Now, you always give me the friendly advice to "just leave" when I say things about EZY you don't want to hear, but why are do you suddenly have such an aggressive tone when debating issues in a company you don't even work for? Why don't you lead by example and just "leave" this debate for the ones involved?

[stansdead]

Rainboe,

You said "Er...my pay has only gone up in 3 years at Ashtray Towers. Also introduced an hourly incentive pay award."

That's one of my points exactly: you seem to revel in telling others to accept less favourable terms and conditions within your own airline.

You just can't understand why other people may find your opinions so hard to accept.

[Clandestino]

Originally Posted by Old King Coal

Many big airlines are laying crews off, but Astraeus is recruiting.

Unbelievable!

Well the point that the Norman Stanley Fletcher is trying to get across is that those new low paid pilots are solely intended to be used as replacements for other decently paid pilots, so net job creation is zero and average pilot income goes down! If it is so, then the race to the bottom has hit the higher gear! And no one, not even mr. Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells has clearly said that NSF is lying, everyone just spouts about Eazyjet-this and Astraeus-that.

Real question here is: "Is the primary role of new Astraeus recruits to replace Aer Lingus pilots?" Let your answers be yea or nay and no more, please.

"Internal issue", thou sayst, Lord Lardy? I guess I must brush up my level 4 English, as the situation where one company hires other to score in a war on the employees doesn't fit my definition of "internal".

[Flyingstig]

Doug, Well put!
Noone seems inclined to answer my query re. the contract that the `UK` AL pilots are on.
My understanding is that it is different to that of `mainline` AL.
Lord L, is this correct?

If so, why arent you all accusing them of being `low paid union busting scabs?`After all the AL union must have agreed the terms. Perhaps the mailine pilots in DUB all came out on strike and I missed it!!

Those guys who took jobs in Astraeus did so in good faith for their own sound reasons.
No doubt if NSF were in the situation of spending 2 months out of 3 away from his family for crap pay rather than work for Astraeus, he would tell them it was `for the greater good`! Well done! He already knows he`s a better man than me, because I know what I would have chosen!!

[Lord Lardy]

Doug, Well put!
Noone seems inclined to answer my query re. the contract that the `UK` AL pilots are on.
My understanding is that it is different to that of `mainline` AL.
Lord L, is this correct?

Aer Lingus pilots operating out of the UK and soon Washington are on a negotiated local contract between the Aer Lingus pilot body and the company. Every serving Aer Lingus pilot regardless of base is a member of IALPA and every pilot a member of a Global Seniority List. Many of the pilots operating out of both UK bases are there on a secondment, meaning they will initially stay in those bases for an assigned period before being given the opportunity to move base should an opportunity arise. They are being paid the local contract rate regardless of the fact they are on a secondment. With the current agreement, thrased out in the Irish Labour court I may add means the most junior pilot in any Aer lingus base has the option to move or apply for promotion into any other Aer Lingus base. As of today there are 83 outstanding command bids for Gatwick from internal applicants wanting to move out of the Republic of Ireland. For those that have already moved or are in the process of moving it requires that you sign a new contract with your pay being reflected as that being paid at the negotiated rates between the employer and IALPA last year.

Aer Lingus are in the process of moving five current Irish registered A320 aircraft off it's books and are Dry Leasing them to Astreaus at a time when they have absolutely no need to do so. This is now where it gets interesting. In the process of doing this they are now claiming they have a surplus of pilots. However, these Aer Lingus coloured and owned aircraft are now going to be crewed by these 'cheap labour' pilots from another company. Aer Lingus to date have not negotiated or entered into talks with it's pilots but are about to enforce compulsory redundancies. 100 pilots is the figure being tossed around up for redundancy. 100 of these pilots have applied for transfer out of their Republic of Ireland contracts to the UK and Washington on local contracts but the company have failed to even consider this. They are going down a path of hiring in this company at a huge and unnecessary cost to crew it's aircraft whilst at the same time making others redundant and in many cases paying others in UK bases to sit at home. This folks is the real picture. This is an additional cost to the Aer Lingus company, not a saving. It is nothing short of an attack on our careers as pilots and Unions. The cost to them is irrelevant. Regardless of what airline you work for you can draw your own conclusions as to what will happen in the future within your airline if they succeed in this poker game.

Someone else asked the following question:

Real question here is: "Is the primary role of new Astraeus recruits to replace Aer Lingus pilots?" Let your answers be yea or nay and no more, please.

The answer is yes. There is no net increase in the number of pilots. They are simply replacing those that are about to be made redundant without any consultation from the company and despite the fact that there is a waiting list of 100 current pilots wanting to move into the Belfast and Gatwick bases on the local contract rates from the Republic of Ireland. So to sum up. If the company allowed it's pilots to transfer onto UK contracts which 100 are only too happy to do they save a fortune. The current situation means they have to pay Astreaus to unnessesarily operate Aer Lingus aircraft and pay them to do so while at the same time having to pay Redundacy payments to it's own staff who they say are surplus to requirements. All this before they add another 4 aircraft to the Gatwick fleet next summer when they will realise they are now short of pilots again. As a shareholder you would have to start asking serious questions. But then the Irish Govenrnment are 25% owners and the silence is deafening to date. However, I stand my previous claim made in an earlier post. This is not the new CEO's proposal. This was devised in the period before he came to office. I still stand by my assertion that he is no fool. In it's current form it's undefendable.

[Flyingstig]

Thanks Lardy.

I must say that I echo Rainboe`s last question.
I thought the new CEO was unfettered by the previous sheenanagans. Why is he embarking on a process that doesnt seem to make financial sense at a time when that is critically what is required, and what he was brought in for?

[Lord Lardy]

Rainboe, the information you are receiving is very selective. The so called higher rates of pay or 'legacy' pay as the company calls it are being paid to those in the Republic of Ireland. The three bases in Belfast, Gatwick and now Washington are on 'local' terms and conditions. Astreaus aircraft will only be flying out of Belfast and Gatwick bases where the company only last week said is very happy with it's cost base. As such the hiring of your company will have no impact on the terms and conditions of the perceived higher paid contracts.

The surplus of pilots is now in the Republic of Ireland as they will be losing 5 aircraft to your company. However the surplus is at the bottom, not at the top where the cost is approximately one third that of those at the upper end and in line with pay at it's UK bases. The only difference is the pension contribution made by company but this is to go anyway. It makes no financial sense. All 100 surplus pilots are First Officers not Captains. These 100 pilots want to move to UK contracts as most are eligible for command. Many of these held command positions in other airlines before joining Aer Lingus and are eager to get back to that seat again. They are voluntarily willing to do this, not forced. The net cost will be less to the the company if they were allowed to move. One must now ask the question as to why the Aer Lingus would employ an outside company to operate it's flight when it has it's own cheapest labour within the department willing to do so. It's financial suicide and does nothing to tackle the higher rates of pay of those at it's home base.

300k by the way is a long way wide of the mark. Don't believe the information the tabloids and their equivalent boast of.

[Lord Lardy]

Thanks Lardy.

I must say that I echo Rainboe`s last question.
I thought the new CEO was unfettered by the previous sheenanagans. Why is he embarking on a process that doesnt seem to make financial sense at a time when that is critically what is required, and what he was brought in for?

Please do point out where this plan will save money when redundancy payments and payment to Astreaus take place? I am intrigued.