easyJet pilots, your management are taking the piss now
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Preferably on terra firma.
Posts: 742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought long and hard about this but in an attempt to pacify those posters who have criticised the easyJet pilots I am copying from the very latest Balpa newsletter.
As most of you know easyJet has been using newly qualified cadets
from CTC to fill our first officer vacancies over the last 2 years. They
have come from various schemes but essentially all are now
contracted via CTC on their Flexi Crew Contract, via Oxford Aviation
Academy (OAA) on their APP Plus scheme or in the case of a few ex-
BMI pilots via Parc Aviation as contractors. In total there will be
over 200 First Officers who will be contracted for this summer of
which we believe around 100 will be at Gatwick.
There have been changes to the contracts being offered by CTC and
OAA this year, the most significant of which has been the removal
of any guarantee of flying, thus removing any guarantee of
earnings. Because of the financial pressure this has created some
cadets, mainly those not flying for easyJet, have chosen to file for
voluntary bankruptcy. The concern is the financial situation many
cadets are in may result in high levels of stress which could effect
their performance. In addition, as the employers are paying no sick
pay, there is a further concern that some cadets feel pressured into
working whilst unfit in order to maintain their income.
All ePG Local Council’s are extremely concerned about this
situation. As you will have seen, BALPA and the other MA’s are
pursuing this as an industry wide issue and there is clearly some
read across from the US Colgan Air accident report. Whilst the
cadets are not directly employed by easyJet, they are not legally
represented by us as ePG Local Councils. However, we have to work
with them and any impairment in their performance puts our
passengers and ourselves at increased risk. We have conveyed our
concerns to the Company and are formulating a proposal which
could bring the cadets into permanent employment sooner. Trying
to make this proposal work without significant cost is a real
challenge, but one we hope to overcome during the next few
months. In the meantime please understand the situation your
colleagues are in.
from CTC to fill our first officer vacancies over the last 2 years. They
have come from various schemes but essentially all are now
contracted via CTC on their Flexi Crew Contract, via Oxford Aviation
Academy (OAA) on their APP Plus scheme or in the case of a few ex-
BMI pilots via Parc Aviation as contractors. In total there will be
over 200 First Officers who will be contracted for this summer of
which we believe around 100 will be at Gatwick.
There have been changes to the contracts being offered by CTC and
OAA this year, the most significant of which has been the removal
of any guarantee of flying, thus removing any guarantee of
earnings. Because of the financial pressure this has created some
cadets, mainly those not flying for easyJet, have chosen to file for
voluntary bankruptcy. The concern is the financial situation many
cadets are in may result in high levels of stress which could effect
their performance. In addition, as the employers are paying no sick
pay, there is a further concern that some cadets feel pressured into
working whilst unfit in order to maintain their income.
All ePG Local Council’s are extremely concerned about this
situation. As you will have seen, BALPA and the other MA’s are
pursuing this as an industry wide issue and there is clearly some
read across from the US Colgan Air accident report. Whilst the
cadets are not directly employed by easyJet, they are not legally
represented by us as ePG Local Councils. However, we have to work
with them and any impairment in their performance puts our
passengers and ourselves at increased risk. We have conveyed our
concerns to the Company and are formulating a proposal which
could bring the cadets into permanent employment sooner. Trying
to make this proposal work without significant cost is a real
challenge, but one we hope to overcome during the next few
months. In the meantime please understand the situation your
colleagues are in.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: erf
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It'll take a smoking orange hole in the ground as the pay-to-pass/fly/work etc SO/FO bins it when the overworked TC misses something.....once the press get hold of that they'll have a field day! 
The above post just hammers the fact home....stressed, overworked, un-fit to fly brand new FO with money issues...now just give him a shiny new 319 to fly full of punters...I can see the headlines now.
The above post just hammers the fact home....stressed, overworked, un-fit to fly brand new FO with money issues...now just give him a shiny new 319 to fly full of punters...I can see the headlines now.
Last edited by windshear-a-head; 25th Feb 2010 at 18:20.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Debtor's Prison
Age: 45
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on folks, why is so much hot air being spouted about who's fault this situation is? What does pinning the blame actually achieve? It's devisive and completely unproductive.
It's equivalent to getting into a fist fight with your wife over who left the gas on while your house burns down around you, rather than calling the fire brigade and at least having a chance to save the house...
Not that I have a ready made battle plan to offer on a plate as some desire. What I do know is that if you can't directly change the situation within the law then you have to at least try some things (again within the law) to level the playing field somewhat.
BALPA needs to do some PR, PR, PR and then some PR on this. It needs to make the issue visible. Get a whip round and buy a bill board outside LGW, take out a full page advert in a red-top. Take the attack back to the management for a change. I can think of a few headlines to go on there...
Most of all, everybody needs to at least try to stand united rather than continually reverting to the default position of tearing lumps out of each other.
It's equivalent to getting into a fist fight with your wife over who left the gas on while your house burns down around you, rather than calling the fire brigade and at least having a chance to save the house...
Not that I have a ready made battle plan to offer on a plate as some desire. What I do know is that if you can't directly change the situation within the law then you have to at least try some things (again within the law) to level the playing field somewhat.
BALPA needs to do some PR, PR, PR and then some PR on this. It needs to make the issue visible. Get a whip round and buy a bill board outside LGW, take out a full page advert in a red-top. Take the attack back to the management for a change. I can think of a few headlines to go on there...
Most of all, everybody needs to at least try to stand united rather than continually reverting to the default position of tearing lumps out of each other.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't like it , don't agree with it but it is the way it is.
Good time to buy a house , you decide it might make you a big profit or you might lose a load of money , it's your choice. Welcome to the world.
No big magic fairy (Balpa) gonna wave their big wand and make it all better.
1000 planes and 10 pilots = Big Money
10 planes and 1000 pilots = No Money
Airlines managers are running a buisiness and not a flying syndicate.
It's all about money , money , money.
I'm a pilot for Easyjet and I don't think I'm alright jack, far from it.
Good time to buy a house , you decide it might make you a big profit or you might lose a load of money , it's your choice. Welcome to the world.
No big magic fairy (Balpa) gonna wave their big wand and make it all better.
1000 planes and 10 pilots = Big Money
10 planes and 1000 pilots = No Money
Airlines managers are running a buisiness and not a flying syndicate.
It's all about money , money , money.
I'm a pilot for Easyjet and I don't think I'm alright jack, far from it.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: southeast
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I tell you what's really starting to hack me off is the way " The I'm allright Jack" criticism/observation is banded around so willingly!! You seem to forget that a lot of us in the ' Ivory Tower' self funded without racking up huge debts based on no security, whilst having a fall back plan should we not realise the dream! There's too much of a blame culture shining through some of these posts for my liking..........I'll get shot down in flames over this post - so what!!!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Where its at
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I would work under worse conditions, why should I support the old guys to be more expensive to the company than myself?
The question is why should you not? If their conditions do not cause you to be worse off, why not support them? Or is it best if they're in the gutter alongside everyone else?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hotel
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are able to do this as they are taking advantage of the very nature of contracting. Pretty much every company under the sun utilises this way of employing people. However there is a stark difference in what we see here. Contractors are normally brought in on much larger increased salaries given that they provide, generally, immediate solutions to difficult problems. Couple this with a lack of sick pay, no holiday allocation etc and you get the idea.
I think every 'cadet' was hoping to accumulate the magic 1500 hours to go and contract elsewhere as soon as possible. The structure of the new deal(s) with a financial bond effectively prohibits that early movement. To be honest I'd be surprised if anyone actually managed to get to the 1500 hour mark given that managements plan must be to share the required hours out over a much bigger flight crew community with most pilots earning per rostered hour on peanuts.
I think every 'cadet' was hoping to accumulate the magic 1500 hours to go and contract elsewhere as soon as possible. The structure of the new deal(s) with a financial bond effectively prohibits that early movement. To be honest I'd be surprised if anyone actually managed to get to the 1500 hour mark given that managements plan must be to share the required hours out over a much bigger flight crew community with most pilots earning per rostered hour on peanuts.
Last edited by djfingerscrossed; 4th Apr 2011 at 00:08.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: A large home for the bewildered
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DJfingerscrossed
If every cadet is doing as you say and jockeying to get 1500 hrs so they can go contract they basically deserve (without understanding) what they're getting into.
But we'll leave that to one side.
DiagonalLeg
I like the way you make your point about it being fruitless to attribute blame.
But you miss the point.
If you were as much in financial poo as they are and you are offered a flying contract - albeit a very bad one - I'd say that not all would take it but a good few would. It's like putting a piece of poisoned meat in front of a hungry dog and telling them not to eat it because it's poisoned. The fact the they are being offered the contract in the first place suggests to me that the easy CC isn't keeping on top of all aspects of the business that affect the pilot workforce - and bringing contractors in with much lower T&Cs has to be one.
In fact the contract is so loaded against the cadet I'd be interested to see if it could be enforced. It's the sort of contract a loan shark would draw up with a "client".
Btw Cmon-Pullup -
More like a narrow escape 
You make yourself sound like a complete coq. Why not use the classic ostrich approach? "Oh you've obviously been turned down for our brilliant job and want to ruin it for all the golden (orange) ones". Get your head out of your a@se and look around you. Situational Awareness is the key and you need to look to yours. 
HS
If every cadet is doing as you say and jockeying to get 1500 hrs so they can go contract they basically deserve (without understanding) what they're getting into.
But we'll leave that to one side.
DiagonalLeg
I like the way you make your point about it being fruitless to attribute blame.
But you miss the point.
If you were as much in financial poo as they are and you are offered a flying contract - albeit a very bad one - I'd say that not all would take it but a good few would. It's like putting a piece of poisoned meat in front of a hungry dog and telling them not to eat it because it's poisoned. The fact the they are being offered the contract in the first place suggests to me that the easy CC isn't keeping on top of all aspects of the business that affect the pilot workforce - and bringing contractors in with much lower T&Cs has to be one.
In fact the contract is so loaded against the cadet I'd be interested to see if it could be enforced. It's the sort of contract a loan shark would draw up with a "client".
Btw Cmon-Pullup -
And then i can just add that with your repeated statements that we are all idiots in Easyjet, then our HR dept did a good job by not taking you in.
EGCC, you sound like you have some really personal issues with ezy, so why do you show any interest in the company at all? (did you get rejected?)
HS
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Samsonite Avenue
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting to see that on a similar thread, someone has mentioned that they have heard that Monarch may be joining forces with CTC Flexicrew.
Very interesting to see a post from one of the Monarch brethren, saying that hell will freeze over before their CC would allow such a thing to happen!!!
Very interesting to see a post from one of the Monarch brethren, saying that hell will freeze over before their CC would allow such a thing to happen!!!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
djfingerscrossed,
You're correct in your assessment of traditional contracting in other industries, but you miss the absolutely fundamental and key point that Could/would/should be attacked, which is that to contract AND BE CLASSED AS A CONTRACTOR BY HMRC you must offer your services - and be able to demonstrate that you are doing so - to more than one company.
If you only ever fly for one airline, then it doesn't matter a hoot - you ARE a deemed employee and your salary should be paid under normal PAYE terms, with the employER facing their costs.
IT contractors (an industry I am VERY closely alligned with currently) face this problem continually.
As stated before, BALPA should be arguing the legal point that anyone on flexicrew is actually a deemed employee, which in turn forces the employer to fund NI and tax contributions. The employER in this case might not be easy directly, but PARC, CTC - but the point remains that they can not operate deemed employees without charging.
You're correct in your assessment of traditional contracting in other industries, but you miss the absolutely fundamental and key point that Could/would/should be attacked, which is that to contract AND BE CLASSED AS A CONTRACTOR BY HMRC you must offer your services - and be able to demonstrate that you are doing so - to more than one company.
If you only ever fly for one airline, then it doesn't matter a hoot - you ARE a deemed employee and your salary should be paid under normal PAYE terms, with the employER facing their costs.
IT contractors (an industry I am VERY closely alligned with currently) face this problem continually.
As stated before, BALPA should be arguing the legal point that anyone on flexicrew is actually a deemed employee, which in turn forces the employer to fund NI and tax contributions. The employER in this case might not be easy directly, but PARC, CTC - but the point remains that they can not operate deemed employees without charging.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hotel
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clanger - I've faced the same problems as yourself in engineering over several years. There are several umbrella companies who do absolutely nothing but charge you for keeping you on the right side of the IR35 whilst you contract for ONE employer. It's bordering very very closely on legality but there you go.
Most engineering agencies I've gone through have always pointed me in there direction. Shocking? Yes. Legal? Probably not.
Harry - I think most realise the implications however they, and I, would rather be treated like
and paid instead of being treated like and paid bugger all.
Most engineering agencies I've gone through have always pointed me in there direction. Shocking? Yes. Legal? Probably not.
Harry - I think most realise the implications however they, and I, would rather be treated like
and paid instead of being treated like and paid bugger all.
Last edited by djfingerscrossed; 3rd Apr 2011 at 19:03.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dubai
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dj- your last paragraph sums up the whole problem. When management know that that's your attitude then contracts like this WILL be the only ones that are offered! You started training in 2008 thus taking a huge gamble and now expect people like me to fight for your cause. I have and will continue to lobby my cc to do make a stand against these conditions but we need a better attitude than that from you guys.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: next to sidestick
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gyni,
What you are saying sadly illustrates the state of mind within the company. You and the others are basically saying "why should I help these cadets, no one forced them to sign". What you guys fail to understand is that the introduction of paid by the hour (and pay to fly) contracts are undermining OUR terms. Whether or not the cadets are right to accept these terms is completely beside the point. If we, as a group, cannot see this as a direct attack on our profession, then perhaps we deserve to be called stupid. We are letting the company screw us over, and it is shocking that all we can come up with is "well they knew what they were signing for" .
and when Balpa come up with this:
sorry, but I have to shake my head in disbelief. We are seeking a zero cost solution to this, when we should be seeking an end to these kind of employment practices, period! easyJet aircraft, easyJet pilot: that's what I expect Balpa ePG to fight for. Nothing less.
and before anyone asks: yes I have made my position clear to my union rep.
What you are saying sadly illustrates the state of mind within the company. You and the others are basically saying "why should I help these cadets, no one forced them to sign". What you guys fail to understand is that the introduction of paid by the hour (and pay to fly) contracts are undermining OUR terms. Whether or not the cadets are right to accept these terms is completely beside the point. If we, as a group, cannot see this as a direct attack on our profession, then perhaps we deserve to be called stupid. We are letting the company screw us over, and it is shocking that all we can come up with is "well they knew what they were signing for" .
and when Balpa come up with this:
We have conveyed our
concerns to the Company and are formulating a proposal which
could bring the cadets into permanent employment sooner. Trying
to make this proposal work without significant cost is a real
challenge, but one we hope to overcome during the next few
months.
concerns to the Company and are formulating a proposal which
could bring the cadets into permanent employment sooner. Trying
to make this proposal work without significant cost is a real
challenge, but one we hope to overcome during the next few
months.
and before anyone asks: yes I have made my position clear to my union rep.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dubai
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZBMan- I totally agree with you!! I'm extremely disappointed in the constant lack of fight amongst us and the lack of leadership from the CC! I'm making the point that EVERYBODY has to do their bit both outside and inside the company! As I said earlier, I have sent emails, spoken to colleagues- what else can I do?!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hotel
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gyni - You don't need to fight for my cause. If it's offered to me I'll be rejecting the deal in it's current state. The point you miss is that I have something else I can do for work AND it will give me the means to repay my loan. Most don't. It is their cause you should fight for as they have nothing else they can do.
Actually on reflection I think you might have misinterpreted my last. I was replying to Harry in that the guys were looking to get 1500 and then grab other positions that paid better even if they were the usual, asian, me, treat us like crap but pay half decent. What I was NOT saying is that we would prefer to take the easy contracts over other jobs.
Actually on reflection I think you might have misinterpreted my last. I was replying to Harry in that the guys were looking to get 1500 and then grab other positions that paid better even if they were the usual, asian, me, treat us like crap but pay half decent. What I was NOT saying is that we would prefer to take the easy contracts over other jobs.