Easy worse than Ryanair

[Coppi]

Don't worry l.scary.hammer aka mol, after the first day of industrial action they will be banging at your door to be your personnal assistants once more and you will finally be all happily reunited.

[spanner the cat]

Thanks TRSS. Your post had some good points too (seriously), until about the 6th paragraph and then it all disappeared in a haze of harps and propaganda. If you toned down the rhetoric people might actually listen more.

...the optimum solution, to avoid any redundancies or compulsory unpaid leave, was to share the winter service reductions around the pilot force by asking, not telling, us to each take a calendar month off, preferably over the winter.

How cosy and agreeable it all sounds. That sounds remarkably like scaling back the quantity of flights. I notice you didn't discuss the likelihood of an arbitarily reduced hourly rate for your contractors. Also a little defensive there about compulsory BRK contracts for new joiners. I believe the EU are looking at employment of contractors. Be interesting to see their take on the stipulation to join via a BRK contract.

Perhaps they worked on the basis, amongst others, of seniority - LIFO: essentially the CC, comprising no doubt a cross section of the most senior pilots, would hardly vote themselves out of a job.

The criteria are negotiated by BALPA, LIFO is mentioned in the employment contract. The company would want to reduce pilot numbers at least cost - base and rank - they had to talk to BALPA. There were NO compulsory redundancies.

Now I'd like you to think the unthinkable. How exactly would a similar exercise be handled in Ryanair? No rhetorical BS now - it was obviously a consideration this winter. What representation would your pilots get? What would be the formula for working out who goes? Do you need to do any of this stuff anyway - you have a massive pool of contractors working for you?

There's enough anecdotal evidence out there of Ryanair's very top-down style of "consultation". It's consultation in name only.

rather the pilots take a balanced view and negotiate directly with the company.

must take ages having individual negotiations (2000+ pilots). It's a wonder anything gets agreed.

EZ seem to be building a head of steam. Their pilots are reaching a tipping point in what they'll accept. They probably only see a further chipping away at their employment terms. The only way their objections will be heard is through their union.

Generally pilots have a vested interest in their respective airlines doing well. I don't know of any airline that has failed because of it's pilots. Generally, managements come and go but pilots (if the airline is any good) tend to stay. Management ideas go in and out of fashion and don't they just lurve reinventing the wheel? Often one of the things preventing the management of an airline driving said airline over a cliff (mostly in the name of short-term efficiencies) are the pilots through BALPA. That there isn't a huge union presence at Ryanair isn't IMHO something to brag about. There isn't a brake on plans - all of which may be very laudable and efficient, but still end up being bad in the long-term. There are no checks and balances. Now credit where credit's due. It doesn't seem to be doing you any harm at the moment (please no propaganda - we can refer to your previous posts). That doesn't mean that it won't in the future and the culture of union bashing is so entrenched that I doubt it would be possible to change.

Spanner

[thebeast]

we have an established ERC and EWC system which utilises representatives.

oh come on Slim you must know thats a total sham!!! nothing has ever been successfully negotiated by the ERC...if you can actually find out who they are or in fact they exist at all!

[The Real Slim Shady]

You say potato, I say pro and anti union aside, has easy lost its way or is it at a crossroads where it could lose its way?

Is easy a low cost, low fare airline or is it another bmi?

Trying to be a low service, no frills "legacy" carrier to major airports and dip toes in many sectors without excelling at any one thing? As a result in danger of alienating the very customers it relies on for its lifeblood. Even the easy website is a nightmare to work through in comparison to the FR site.

Flying a mixed fleet, as opposed to one type ( OK the 320 and 321 share a common TR but it doesn't make crew training or reservations any simpler) and not focusing a la Southwest on secondary airports - faster turn round, fewer delays.

Was, is the Airbus the correct choice for a loco - needs steps, baggage loaders etc?

I'm not stirring just opening up the debate on the comparison with the FR model.

[Gary Lager]

You say potato, I say pro and anti union aside, has easy lost its way or is it at a crossroads where it could lose its way?

Is easy a low cost, low fare airline or is it another bmi?

a) could be.

b) I am worried it's starting to look more like the latter.

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

Slim - just to correct any misunderstanding regarding the A319/320/321 type rating. It is indeed the same rating and the A319/320 are used interchangeably. Any Airbus-trained crew at easyJet (soon to be all crew once the 737 finally goes) can fly either aircraft. The A321 (we have 3 of them I believe) requires 4 sectors line training and no further sim training of any kind. That is an easyJet imposed training requirement and not an Airbus one. The A321 really only affects Gatwick and the only crews who fly it (apart from a few managers!) are ex-GB guys. At the drop of a hat we could 'train' everyone on it if required and thus far that has not proven necessary. In terms of pricing, we had the choice between Airbus and Boeing and I am led to believe that the price from Airbus was embarrassingly low. They had no low-co buyers at that stage and basically were desperate to get one. We got our A319s at a fraction of the market price.

What I think is legitimate debate is whether we should have gone for 189-seaters like yourselves instead of the 156-seaters we have in the A319. Also had we gone for 150-seaters we would only require 3 cabin crew which would have saved a fortune. Interesingly enough, our latest aircraft are A320s with 180 seats from which you can draw your own conclusions. Another factor in the decision was space on the production line at the time the offer was made. But in terms of the price we paid, Ryanair can only dream of getting their 737s on the same deal. From what I read in the press, they are finding Boeing less than receptive to the MoL customer technique of saying, "You piece of xxxx, give me your xxxxxx 737s at a quarter of their value or I will not buy any more - to be sure". Strange that Boeing think themselves above being spoken to like that - why would that be?

[The Real Slim Shady]

NSF - You lost total credibility in the last post when you added "To be sure"

I've never heard Michael say that

[wilf102]

Are you sure?

[go around flaps15]

Norman "to be sure" Stanley Fletcher. AS slim said you have just blown any credibility you might have had right out of the water with a post like that.

[blackred1443]

Where as you swearing at me clearly increases your credibilty? Watch out the credibilty police on an internet forum open to every nutter on the planet are about!

PS Goaroundflaps I think Slim might have been joking the clue is in the icon!

[antonov09]

Ummm and I think we had a little talk about FR interviews being £1000. I think you posted earlier £300. I was told by a friend in FR that its £260. Lack of research on a topic and you are now talking about credibility. Hmmmm

[blackred1443]

Antonov
For the second time I believe i said approx £1000, but that included flights, accomodation x 2 nights, food, taxis, car parking at airport etc etc. Though yes £800 depending on the exchange rate that day in the case of my mate was probaby closer to the mark! Both your info and mine is secondhand so it won't always be 100% accurate. I was merely stating when people mention credibilty on an internet forum open to the general public its a bit daft. For all i know your an 80 year women who speaks to dead people in a home for mental health patients.....So your point is what exactly?

Yes i did post £300 earlier but i think the £40 difference is small change when your about to pay £33k for the TR or is that £32950 if we are being precise

[antonov09]

Lack of research. I do feel like an 80 year old woman. As for information, I got mine from the horses mouth. It appears you got some of yours from the horses........

[blackred1443]

Lack of research, what are you talking about. Im not doing a masters in ryr. Is £200 or £500 that much of a big deal when your about to pay 33k for a TR and sign a BRK contract with no sick pay,no lol, no pension, no guarantee of any hours, no crew food, pay for own lpc/opc,uniform and dodgy tax dealings. In the words of mastercard 'priceless'.

The £500 would be the least of my worries

I'd rather back War of Attrition than talk to him, each to their own i guess

[antonov09]

"im not doing a masters on ryr" Im glad your not, you would need to have a degree on ryr first but your getting there blackred