Easy worse than Ryanair

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

Big changes afoot at easyJet. Just announced this morning that Andy Harrison, easyJet CEO, stepping down in June 2010. I personally do not see this as good news and fear he will be replaced by a hard-nose numpty like his predecesor. I wish him well but just hope he does not take-over as BA's CEO from Willy Walsh. Interesting times.

[Doug the Head]

Big changes afoot at easyJet. Just announced this morning that Andy Harrison, easyJet CEO, stepping down in June 2010.

Hmmm, so much for that "career airline" and "making EZY a great place to work" rhetoric of his...

[Alycidon]

Would you now recommend that the EMA crews losing their base just head off to RYR rather than relocating, since the race to the bottom now seems to be well under way.

[Zippy Monster]

Equally, what was the union doing allowing flexicrew to take the jobs of existing FOs?

They probably didn't realise until it was too late, because the company didn't tell them. What was the cadet scheme has always been accepted in the past, and until 2008 they were all given full-time permanent employment afterwards. This was never a problem. Then the company suddenly changed their tack at the end of last year and FlexiCrew came into being - before BALPA knew, or could do anything, about it.

I was disappointed with BALPA's response to our situation at the time, but I understand it and I really can't see how anyone can blame them for this particular part of the situation. The only gripe I have with them is how slow they have been to respond, develop a policy on this type of employment and decide how they are going to go about tackling it. That is a problem.

The key point, though, is that FlexiCrew was not a totally new concept, but something which morphed into existence unexpectedly from what used to be the cadet entry scheme, before anybody could do anything about it. You cannot blame BALPA for this, particularly as - I reiterate - the cadets do not have any representation.

[The Real Slim Shady]

Zippy, your answer leads me to ask what the CC and BALPA could have done to ensure that the cadets did have representation: I was on the phone to a mate at bmi this morning and got first hand info on how the buck was passed around there regarding the 145s.

If the easy CC had the will to deal with the situation, along with assertive support from BALPA HQ, the situation could easily have been resolved: which validates my assertion that BALPA and the CCs are prepared to sacrifice individuals and minorities for the benefit of other groups, notably the CC reps!!

[Coppi]

"which validates my assertion that BALPA and the CCs are prepared to sacrifice individuals and minorities for the benefit of other groups, notably the CC reps!!"

Totally unsubstantiated and a slanderous allegation without any trace of proof as usual.
The anonimity under which you conveniently hide to slander Balpa at every opportunity unfortunately allows you to spread unsubstantiated lies around without consequences.
Your aim is to try to discredit them so as to prevent recognition at ruinair, thus loyally serving your master mol.

[BitMoreRightRudder]

which validates my assertion that BALPA and the CCs are prepared to sacrifice individuals and minorities for the benefit of other groups, notably the CC reps!!

Maybe in certain airlines, most definitely not in ezy. As has been stated by many, the cc at ezy have done a fantastic job, for all of us. The flexi-crew problem stems as much from ezy management as it does from CTC who are now literally prostituting cadets. For CTC see BRK, they are becoming one and the same.

Too many people constantly come out with the stuff TRSS mentions above - I'm sick of hearing it at ezy "oh well balpa didn't look after me when this happened", fair enough but it is the here and now that we are having to fight in, merely to keep what we have. Inadequacies of BALPA past need to be put aside. The ezy cc have offered fantastic leadership, as always it is down to the pilot workforce to act together and show some backbone. So it is easy to see how BALPA will never achieve anything at FR.

[CamelhAir]

Slim, a union is only as good as its members desire it to be. Hence the problem in fr. Ezy pilots have more backbone - and the effectiveness of Balpa in ezy vs fr reflects that.
The point about past alleged balpa misdemeanours is irrelevant. The here and now counts. Generals usually prepare to fight the last war, it seems to me that balpa are not falling into that trap at ezy. Neither, slim, should you.

[RAT 5]

If AH is leaving, might WB have aspirations to step up? if so, then expect ez to become RYR Mk.2 very quickly. That will test the mettle of the crews. It could also mean a bumper Christmas 2010 for BRK. They might just corner the LoCo crewing market. AGH.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

I am confident when I say you won't find a single BALPA member in easyJet who doesn't think every member of the Company Council does a fantastic, impartial, difficult task to the best of their abilities at a considerable personal cost to themselves.

Any suggestion that they further a narrow personal agenda would be laughable were it not do indignantly contemptible.

Next years BALPA fees are more than covered by the crew food refund that the union forced the company to pay on threat of legal action. It pays for itself most years I find..


WWW

[PPRuNeUser0178]

Crew food refund?

Inside info you'd like to share there WWW?

[Viking101]

The whole business has become corrupt.

Its all about the money, and "a great place to work" where there is bonus to collect.

We, as workers, are trying to do our job and at the same time have a life with some T&Cs left. On the other side of the ring you find greedy people who dont care about the numbers (employees) but only looking for their own benefits.

In the middle you find BALPA, trying to equalize the huge gap in interests to our benefit bearing in mind the companys future in some ways.

As it has been the last 2 years, I find that we have come very far from eachither. We want a secure future and a great place to work, where we all are happy and get what we deserve. I feel that the managament have done a lot just to p*ss us off and create a bad atmosphere. At the same time they are making their very important decisions on how their own bonus will be affected from which account and that is why the left hand has no idea of what the right hand is doing. Thats why we have problems with crewing levels. Thats why we have a lot of other problems, most of them really stupid and unneccesary....

This is what happens when you have the wrong people in a management. And I am not confident it will change- greed gives birth to greed. Thus the replacement of AH will not be better... They are all the same

[spanner the cat]

TRSS - you're more than a little disingenuous by mentioning other airlines redundancies. In the main the respective CCs have done their level best to prevent job losses - sometimes with 100% success.

As an example I think you are missing the point with BALPA's negotiations last year with Thomson about the then surplus. As a result of last years negotiations a deal was done to keep up to 96 pilots in work - in practice the number was just over 40. Other measures were taken, career breaks and voluntary severance in order to prevent compulsory redundancies. The company had to listen and work with BALPA. Result - no compulsory redundancies (the original figure was nearly 200)

This time around the negotiations are probably not going to be anything like this, possibly there's a bit more to it than just a simple surplus. In the past, the same managers, when they managed First Choice, would have just imposed a settlement. With a strong union they have to talk. It also has to be accepted that sometimes the talks won't go the way the pilots would want it to but the talks still take place.

Contrast this with what happens when RYR have to scale back - effectively what has happened during this downturn. Compulsory time off (contractors = no pay). Sounds like the hourly rate for contractors will be reduced - negotiation not required as they're contractors. All new joiners on a BRK contract - don't have to pay them off and no union monkeyshines from them either. I can guess only too well what would happen if there had to be large scale layoffs. It'd be carnage. No union, no voice. Saying ah it'll never happen 'cos we're Ryanair doesn't really cut it.

BALPA isn't perfect but with a good CC and solid backing from the pilots an airline has to take note if there's an objection to what's going on.

The flexi-crew / cadet thing is another matter. I believe that BALPA did take their collective eye off the ball on that but to suggest that it was done so as to benefit individual CC members is a very poor thing to say .
If anything the failing was at a national level - and something that they finally seem to be getting their teeth into.

EZ management would probably love to have their pilots as cowed as they are in Ryanair (which airline management wouldn't). If the CC with full support of the pilots successfully fights against the erosion in Ts and Cs, it won't happen.

Spanner

[The Real Slim Shady]

Spanner - you do have some valid points, however, "disingenuous" is probably a poor choice of word in the context you used it.

CCs can do little to prevent redundancies brought about by market forces or mismanagement: what they can do, in the easy and bmi cases, is to enforce the extant agreements: what you have to ask yourself, as a union member in those companies, is why they didn't.

Your union strength is founded on 2 pillars: unity being one, in so much as the group acts with one voice, and equivalency, in so much that the same agreements, terms and conditions are applied, and upheld, without favour across the spectrum of the workforce.

Modern day cross border organisations tend to make the application of the latter difficult as local agreements,market forces and political and social requirements may encourage variations. The cost of living in Spain or Poland may have an effect on the salary structure as the cost of corporate social taxation, as in France, may be the catalyst to minimise staff wage costs.

Additionally, employers are now looking, across the board, to utilise more agency and contract staff to provide them with more flexibility: as those numbers have risen so union membership has reduced. Interestingly, the decline in union membership has been minimal in the public sector whereas the reductions in the private sector have been quite substantial. From 1995, membership has reduced by around 0.7% per year across the board with the private sector membership reducing by around 1.2% per annum.

So with those few points in mind how does the efficacy of BALPA, with its CC system stack up: the figures you quote, at Thomson, of 200 compulsory redundancies reduced to 160 redundancies, career breaks etc - 200 less the 40 you say were kept in work - doesn't say a lot for your strong union. 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.

Nevertheless, because it was union driven, and the union and CC are a valid cross section of the entire workforce, it must be the optimum solution.

Equally, was the introduction of Regional crews at LHR by bmi, in breach of the scope agreement, the optimum solution for a strong union? Or did they take their eye off the ball again?

On the contrary, in your hypothetical situation that Ryanair are scaling back ( 55 deliveries next year, 400+ new FOs, 400+ commands DEC and internal promotion, 3500+ cabin crew with the attendant jobs created on the ground ) you assert that we are all given compulsory time off with the contractors getting no pay.

You are quite correct that the contractors don't get paid when they are off, even on days off: they are paid by the block hour. That is the contract they signed up to: whether you would sign up to that would be your choice, and you can have your opinion on the rights or wrongs of that contract, but no one forced anyone to sign on the dotted line.

Where you are wrong though is that the time off is compulsory: I concede that one interpretation could hold it in that light, however, we tend to call time off annual leave and the management were clear to explain that 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.

By agreeing to this the pilot force avoided cutbacks, redundancies, career breaks: what we didn't need was a union acting as a go between. The pilots at STN, last year did the same thing when service reductions were needed over the winter: they all agreed that the pain should be shared, not foisted on the contractors or, in the seniority list comparison, on the most junior pilots.

So no union, no voice hasn't materialised: rather the pilots take a balanced view and negotiate directly with the company.

As a result of that we have managed to avoid redundancies over the winter: at the EWC meeting in Dublin the statement from the Head of HR was " Our primary aim is avoid making anyone redundant". At that meeting the pilots, and cabin crew, were actively involved in exploring ways we could cut costs without cutting service and discussing ways of increasing our ancillary revenue. I don't recall anyone being cowed: quite the reverse, people empowered to take a very active part in the running of the company.

Additionally, the pilots at FR are free to join, or be members of, any union they wish: the majority choose not to join or to be represented.

So on the one hand, you have the union represented companies cutting back, pilots taking redundancy, compulsory and voluntarily, career breaks and early retirement: you have pilots in one unionised company happily working outside their scope agreement in another unionised company where massive redundancies are now on the cards. Card carrying member against card carrying member, CC against CC, all underwritten by the union, who took their collective eye off the ball.

On the other hand, you have 2000+ pilots working for FR, the vast majority quite happy, getting on with job, getting home at night - bear in mind the "floaters" choose that contract - and getting paid every month with no threat of redundancy or cutbacks. Pilots who do negotiate, just not through a third party, but who take an active part in ensuring that the company makes money. No infighting, no flexi cadets, no selling line training hours to fill seats and no regional pilots taking the jobs of mainline pilots.

Horses for courses.

[siftydog]

Slim shady, there's something you don't quite get here.
In EJ, the pilots are our union. The union are our pilots.
That way, unlike you we don't have to have all 1600 of us hammer and tongs at MOL simultaneously negotiating a a month off unpaid while a day rate contractor sweeps up our work. It's just easier with elected representatives (who know their stuff).

And no. I am not one......

[bizdev]

Flying Club

I visited EZY head office at Luton for the first time around 1998 when head office consisted of a portacabin (easyLand) with three desks in it - one for Stellios, one for the Chief Pilot, and one for the Chief Engineer (I exagerate - but not by much). I continued to visit on a regular basis (as a supplier to EZY) and watched the growth with interest as more and more portacabins were bolted on.

If you read Barbara Cassani's book 'Go: An Airline Adventure' she writes about a similar start up to EZY. The early years were very exciting where everyone knew everyone and worked crazy hours doing roles not within their job description and was run very much like a Flying Club - happy days.

Unfortunately - when you get to a certain size, and continue to grow, you cannot run it like a flying club anymore - now you have the stockmarket and shareholders to answer to. Now you have a shed load of people who do not self manage themselves but need managing. So you need managers.

In my working life I have never been in an organisatioin where the managers were not blamed for everything - even when the management staff have been turned over numurous times (as they have in EZY). Perhaps there is no such thing as a good manager - he simply does not exist - maybe because you cannot keep all of the people happy all of the time.

During my time at BA - in the early years the senior management were heaviliy critisised for having no Airline Experience - now you have an Airline Pilot running the show but he is still "useless".

The point I'm making is that large organisations need management. Managers need to be able to manage. Often management will make decisions which not everyone will like. But the days when EZY were a 'flying club' are long gone.

bizdev

[The Real Slim Shady]

Sifty, I do get it and that is one of the points I made: CC against CC at bmi.

The easy CC allowing the flexi crew scheme - your colleagues, not someone at BALPA HQ, even tho they rubber stamp the deal.

Of course, you miss the point: at FR the BRK pilots are an integral part of our established crew complement, ergo, they don't take work from FR contract pilots, nor do we have 1600 + pilots all bickering at MOL, we have an established ERC and EWC system which utilises representatives.

[siftydog]

Very good slim - so the Ryan pilots are all Balpa but by name then obviously.

We could all stand here in a years time and swap notes as to who's lost the most in the last decade - but then that would be a silly little pissing competition wouldn't it. Good luck with your teethed up non - union type union.

[Leo Hairy-Camel]

Meanwhile, in the real world.....

If I were you, Siftydog, I'd be rather more interested in who remains standing in a year from now. Take off your blinkers long enough and you too will note the squirming in the seats going on among investment analysts and industry observers at the changing of the guard in Orangeland.

AH leaves, finally, after having a gut full of Stelios, WB is champing at the bit with mousaka on his breath, and to this heady mix we can add the most interesting development of all.

Brady or Coyle, Brady or Coyle? Brady AND Coyle! Now that would be interesting.

Good luck, Orange men. The marching season is upon us.

[u0062]

I hope Balpa has recruited a few more staff. When the orange guys get a sniff of this one the membership numbers will take off. (forgive the pun).