UNITE for pilots?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hangar 69
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that Bruce Wayne, Norman and Basil are living in the past with their left vs right wing frame of mind. Be honest, aren't all unions per definition leaning towards the left? Isn't it the unions that provide the necessary status quo between the big business interests and the labour (!) force?
I don't know many pilots that want a bunch of "left wing bullies" as union representatives, yet what good is that (pro-Torys?) paper tiger called BALPA? Isn't BALPA the same relic from the past that you folks accuse UNITE of? A fat cat, raking in the fees/dues and providing f*ck all in return? What's the alternative to a weak/no union? To be intimidated by 'right wing bullies' like MOL and his henchmen TRSS and LHC?
Judging by the extremely p!ss poor job BALPA has done to even try to maintain that status quo in a profitable airline like EZY, I can definitely understand why some pilots would be interested in bringing a more militant union into the picture...
The rot needs to be stopped!
p.s. interesting reading: "The Grapes of Wrath" by John Steinbeck! Quite a few similarities to what's going on in aviation.
I don't know many pilots that want a bunch of "left wing bullies" as union representatives, yet what good is that (pro-Torys?) paper tiger called BALPA? Isn't BALPA the same relic from the past that you folks accuse UNITE of? A fat cat, raking in the fees/dues and providing f*ck all in return? What's the alternative to a weak/no union? To be intimidated by 'right wing bullies' like MOL and his henchmen TRSS and LHC?
Judging by the extremely p!ss poor job BALPA has done to even try to maintain that status quo in a profitable airline like EZY, I can definitely understand why some pilots would be interested in bringing a more militant union into the picture...
The rot needs to be stopped!
p.s. interesting reading: "The Grapes of Wrath" by John Steinbeck! Quite a few similarities to what's going on in aviation.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Left of the centerline
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The striking hosties did have a sign up on their picketline that said "Fee Hugs" now i think i counted 38 girls on the picket line and a very strange thought went through my mind so i honked even louder...
Doug,
but then you say:
sort of contradicted yourself there.
So not leaning towards the left?
By UK standards BALPA seemed to negotiate pretty good conditions for BA pilots.
"The Grapes of Wrath"? Well, we may have just seen Utopia come and go in one generation. I know that if I had been expected to pay for my flying training I'd have continued as an engineer; never felt I needed to be a captain to define myself.
Bruce Wayne, Norman and Basil are living in the past with their left vs right wing frame of mind
aren't all unions per definition leaning towards the left?
that (pro-Torys?) paper tiger called BALPA? Isn't BALPA the same relic from the past that you folks accuse UNITE of? A fat cat, raking in the fees/dues and providing f*ck all in return?
By UK standards BALPA seemed to negotiate pretty good conditions for BA pilots.
"The Grapes of Wrath"? Well, we may have just seen Utopia come and go in one generation. I know that if I had been expected to pay for my flying training I'd have continued as an engineer; never felt I needed to be a captain to define myself.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hangar 69
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sort of contradicted yourself there.
So what if Unite associate themselves with Labour? So what if they are "left wing?" They can be Church of Scientology for all I care (
), as long as they get the job done! When the managing directors of several profitable airlines (mind you, I'm not talking about a loss making BA here!) pays themselves big bucks in bonuses whilst shafting pilots by 'employing' pay-as-you-go cadets with 100K debt to a bank, then there's something seriously wrong with a) the industry and b) the unions for letting them get away with it! There needs to be a credible counter weight to balance this way of thinking, or else we all will be working for a bus drivers wages sooner than you can say: "where the f**k did my salary and T&C go?!"
Like I said, unions are a necessary evil. I do not advocate the French/Italian/Greek-style unions, but I also believe that the old fashioned way of a 'gentleman-like' (i.e. mature, soft, BALPA-like) way of dealing with management is unfortunately completely outdated. Perhaps this gentleman-like approach still works okay for pilots in BA (or the banking sector
), but in the low-cost sector this definitely doesn't work, just look at the various threads on this forum regarding EZY, pay-2-fly scams and other airlines... The world has changed a lot since the glory days of BALPA and it's time to wake up and smell the coffee!
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 3433N 06912E
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doug,
A large portion of the problem for carriers in the UK is the impact of poor legislation and taxation decisions levied by the government which all contribute to the profitability of carrier operations.
BALPA itself has fought the APD issue a supposed "green tax". A. Darling in November admitted publicly that the funds raised from APD were being used to prop up the bailed out banks.
So with government policy driving this issue down the tubes, carriers are cutting costs. Aircraft lease rates ? nope. fixed per lease term and as the UK currency slides the real cost increases (same with capital assets amortised over a term). fuel.. again poor government policy has increase the cost and again, as the UK currency slides the real cost increases, airport operating costs, increased due to taxation and policy and cannot be controlled by the carrier.. subsequently crew costs are being driven down.
Government policy that supports this industry (and other business sectors), will allow air carriers to be more profitable and as such provide better T&C's.
UNITE funds this government, the same government that has damaged our industry.
There does exist a bigger picture here; And that is not living in the past.
A large portion of the problem for carriers in the UK is the impact of poor legislation and taxation decisions levied by the government which all contribute to the profitability of carrier operations.
BALPA itself has fought the APD issue a supposed "green tax". A. Darling in November admitted publicly that the funds raised from APD were being used to prop up the bailed out banks.
So with government policy driving this issue down the tubes, carriers are cutting costs. Aircraft lease rates ? nope. fixed per lease term and as the UK currency slides the real cost increases (same with capital assets amortised over a term). fuel.. again poor government policy has increase the cost and again, as the UK currency slides the real cost increases, airport operating costs, increased due to taxation and policy and cannot be controlled by the carrier.. subsequently crew costs are being driven down.
Government policy that supports this industry (and other business sectors), will allow air carriers to be more profitable and as such provide better T&C's.
So what if Unite associate themselves with Labour?
There does exist a bigger picture here; And that is not living in the past.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do agree with the comments that BALPA are currently 'under-performing' - alot of talking, cosy committees, dubious fee structure, expenses MPs would be proud of.
However if there was someone out there who could shake BALPA up and make it ready for the 21st Century?????
However if there was someone out there who could shake BALPA up and make it ready for the 21st Century?????
Join Date: May 2009
Location: A whole new world now!!
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote NormanStanleyFletcher
"Alas, their cabin crew, goaded on by the half-wits at Unite do not seem to realise that. I simply do not get it - how could anyone want Unite to represent the pilot community?"
As CC I have zero idea first hand how BALPA operate but I have first hand experience of how UNITE do. IMHO they are a double edged saw.
I have been lurking on the pilot threads for a while now as the CC/SLF ones are for the most part devoted to opinions re BA
. Having just had my latest "communication" from Unite which astounded me at the loaded wording I'm going to add my twopenneth here.
Firstly If you are an individual at odds with management and have a good case Unite will fight your corner. Their base reps for the most part are first class and know their stuff. If they don't (inexperience) they will go and find out. Unite's legal dept are second to none and take no crap from management or management's solicitors. I know this from first hand experience.
The BA 777 Captain who IMHO was a hero at LHR and is now out of work may not have been had he had the support and backing of Unite.....they would have done a better job than Balpa. Maybe Norman that is why Pilot's should consider Unite as an alternative?
However the flip side is that Unite will stir up a hornets nest collectively and they are underhand IMHO in the way they do it. I don't have much insight into their actions at BA but this is what I have experienced at EZY recently from them.
A few months ago a comms to our home adresses attempting to divide CC and Pilots re T&C's. It even contained copy corrospondence to our Head of Cabin Services who I have no time for (
) to incite us. Whatever we may think of her she should be assured she can have her union corrospondence kept private otherwise she may just not corrospond. The potential effect on CRM could have been really bad as well.......
Today I have received a "Consultative Ballot" paper from Unite. It asks "do I feel safe with easyjet reducing crew on the 319 and are you happy easyjet has done this". Tick yes or no. What a loaded question
I am a mature SCCM so can read between the lines here. Am I happy? No of course not as I and my crew have to work harder....3 have to do the work 4 would normally do for exactly the same money.
Do I feel safe? Yes of course I do. Seats will be reduced to reflect the reduced crew to the CAA requirements. Procedures will be revised to reflect the responsibility of dual exits and many airlines do this anyway.
But what box will the majority of crew tick and is this how Unite conducted their ballot at BA.....by dropping the word safety into the reduced crew compliments.
I'm rambling so back to thread......Unite for Pilots? They offer a good service individually, collectively they are questionable. I suppose you have decide what is important overall
"Alas, their cabin crew, goaded on by the half-wits at Unite do not seem to realise that. I simply do not get it - how could anyone want Unite to represent the pilot community?"
As CC I have zero idea first hand how BALPA operate but I have first hand experience of how UNITE do. IMHO they are a double edged saw.
I have been lurking on the pilot threads for a while now as the CC/SLF ones are for the most part devoted to opinions re BA
. Having just had my latest "communication" from Unite which astounded me at the loaded wording I'm going to add my twopenneth here.Firstly If you are an individual at odds with management and have a good case Unite will fight your corner. Their base reps for the most part are first class and know their stuff. If they don't (inexperience) they will go and find out. Unite's legal dept are second to none and take no crap from management or management's solicitors. I know this from first hand experience.
The BA 777 Captain who IMHO was a hero at LHR and is now out of work may not have been had he had the support and backing of Unite.....they would have done a better job than Balpa. Maybe Norman that is why Pilot's should consider Unite as an alternative?
However the flip side is that Unite will stir up a hornets nest collectively and they are underhand IMHO in the way they do it. I don't have much insight into their actions at BA but this is what I have experienced at EZY recently from them.
A few months ago a comms to our home adresses attempting to divide CC and Pilots re T&C's. It even contained copy corrospondence to our Head of Cabin Services who I have no time for (
) to incite us. Whatever we may think of her she should be assured she can have her union corrospondence kept private otherwise she may just not corrospond. The potential effect on CRM could have been really bad as well.......Today I have received a "Consultative Ballot" paper from Unite. It asks "do I feel safe with easyjet reducing crew on the 319 and are you happy easyjet has done this". Tick yes or no. What a loaded question
I am a mature SCCM so can read between the lines here. Am I happy? No of course not as I and my crew have to work harder....3 have to do the work 4 would normally do for exactly the same money.
Do I feel safe? Yes of course I do. Seats will be reduced to reflect the reduced crew to the CAA requirements. Procedures will be revised to reflect the responsibility of dual exits and many airlines do this anyway.
But what box will the majority of crew tick and is this how Unite conducted their ballot at BA.....by dropping the word safety into the reduced crew compliments.
I'm rambling so back to thread......Unite for Pilots? They offer a good service individually, collectively they are questionable. I suppose you have decide what is important overall
Last edited by lowcostdolly; 9th Apr 2010 at 11:39. Reason: Spelling/grammar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: nowhere near here
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BA CC strike over losing one member of staff on some flights is a bit pointless but I whole heartidly agree with them for striking over new comers T+C being worse than existing contracts. If only aircrew did the same, pay to fly would not exist, neither would contracting. And how much more effective would striking pilots be, they can hardly train up office staff to cover..!
If so, I doubt problems such as pay-to-fly could have been solved so easily.
On the main question I have to say that there is no way on this earth I would be a member of Unite. I wouldn't even be a member of Balpa if it sheltered underneath Unite's umbrella.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 3433N 06912E
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BA 777 Captain who IMHO was a hero at LHR and is now out of work may not have been had he had the support and backing of Unite.....they would have done a better job than Balpa. Maybe Norman that is why Pilot's should consider Unite as an alternative?
Rather than take the media line, you will find a post from the very man here on Pprune, addressing the media reports.
He took VR as choice, it's on these threads in his own words.
Non sequitur.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: A whole new world now!!
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bruce
I wasn't aware I had taken the "media line". The only media coverage I've seen of that incident was the initial news reports when it happened. I've no idea of their "line" on things since
My very limited knowledge of the incident based is based on browsing the thread on here. I've just ordered Peter's book to get a better insight.
I'm aware Peter took VR through choice. I'm also aware that maybe he felt he had no choice. The thread alludes to this. When a Captain is apparently being undermined by so called SEP trainers to junior crew the rumour mill will kick in.........
What I see here (and I could be wrong) is an individual disgracefully treated by his management and even worse his CC colleagues who should have been supporting him.
His union's idea of support was drinks and a curry
Where were they when BA started behaving badly? Where were they when the slanderous gossip started? I'm assuming Peter would have made them aware of this.
My point in my previous post was that Unite would have been far more pro active and supported him individually. I'm think there would have been a legal case here. For instance if Peter felt he had to leave because of the gossip/poor support from BA there could have been a case for constructive dismissal and slander?? I don't know of course as I'm no legal expert but Unite's legal dept are first rate....they would know.
If the media "line" was that Peter and his FO were heroes I make no apology for taking that. They were. They saved many lives that day.
I wasn't aware I had taken the "media line". The only media coverage I've seen of that incident was the initial news reports when it happened. I've no idea of their "line" on things since
My very limited knowledge of the incident based is based on browsing the thread on here. I've just ordered Peter's book to get a better insight.
I'm aware Peter took VR through choice. I'm also aware that maybe he felt he had no choice. The thread alludes to this. When a Captain is apparently being undermined by so called SEP trainers to junior crew the rumour mill will kick in.........
What I see here (and I could be wrong) is an individual disgracefully treated by his management and even worse his CC colleagues who should have been supporting him.
His union's idea of support was drinks and a curry
Where were they when BA started behaving badly? Where were they when the slanderous gossip started? I'm assuming Peter would have made them aware of this.My point in my previous post was that Unite would have been far more pro active and supported him individually. I'm think there would have been a legal case here. For instance if Peter felt he had to leave because of the gossip/poor support from BA there could have been a case for constructive dismissal and slander?? I don't know of course as I'm no legal expert but Unite's legal dept are first rate....they would know.
If the media "line" was that Peter and his FO were heroes I make no apology for taking that. They were. They saved many lives that day.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 3433N 06912E
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Hero Capt. Signs On' was the media presentation.
I have been reading some of the online newspaper articles and before anyone starts ranting I would like to make some comments. I have read various manner of negative comments over the past 18 months and I've had to sit back and simply read but not respond, I feel confident now that I can respond to today's articles.
My wife, Maria, did not approach the press. The local paper found out that I had taken jobseekers allowance and phoned for a comment. Maria confirmed that it was true and they asked if I had a job to go to. She told them I didn't have a job and jokingly mentioned about "no accident/no incident" at Korean Air. We knew I had been rejected for an interview at Korean back in May/June and have accepted that this is their policy.
I "signed on" so that my NI stamp and national pension could be paid. I think I have paid enough tax over the years and surely the least I can ask for is that there is no stop in my NI contributions?
I chose to take VR based on numerous reasons that I will not talk about now, but the decision to take it was always knowing that I wouldn't be walking into a job. I chose to take a year's pay with the gamble that I would get a job within 12 months. I have learnt since Jan 08 not to just plod along but to live and enjoy life, and as a family we decided that leaving BA and having the security of 12 months pay was worth the gamble to find a job.
I have known that EK are not recruiting DEC for a little while now and happily changed my application from DEC to F/O. I'm sure no-one can be suprised that I intially applied for DEC? I have also applied to some other carriers as F/O. It is also no secret on this site that no-one is as of yet interviewing for F/O on the 777. (if you do know of anyone then let me know so I can tell the dole!).
I expected to leave BA at the end of Aug and have some months with the family. I need and want this time to relax with them. It is my impression that various airlines should start interviewing soon and I would like to think that I should get an interview as an F/O, even thinking like this, no job would start until 5-6 months from now.
I chose to take VR. I expected to not be flying again for at least 6 months. 3 weeks from leaving BA nothing has changed from my expected plan so why would Maria whine to the papers? We have seen a comment on a couple of the online papers that state that "our finances are so tight we may lose our house", then in a later paragraph it says "if Pete doesn't work then in Aug we may have to start thinking about selling the house". Today are finances are not tight. Last year was different, after a reduced wage for a few months we noticed our finances were stretched and maybe the first quote comes from then. The second quote is valid, but if I have a year's pay and didn't work in the 11 months from now until Aug, then there would be issues with my finances, but that would be the same for anyone. And I don't expect to not work in the next 11 months (whether this be in the air or on the ground).
I do not want anyone to think that Maria is whining about money, we are more fortunate with our finances than a lot of people, I walked away from a job with a payout, a lot of people are not so lucky. We took this gamble and we will see where the year takes us, but today we are happy and positive. I am thinking of attempting to do after dinner speaking and Maria and I are writing a book - but do you think we would be stupid enough to be so extreme in this that it shoots me in the foot to never being able to get another job?
Maria is taking on extra shifts in work as a Paramedic not for the money but because she enjoys it. At the moment she works 3 shifts a month, as I do the childcare and she had to work around my days off (I've 3 boys - 4,3,2). Now that I am home she can do extra shifts as I am free to have the boys anytime.
Some people will never understand why I took VR at 45 with no job to go to. Some people may one day decide to find out why I took it. All that matters to me though is that it was the right thing to do for the family as a whole, and things are going as expected. The papers have totally gone wild regarding KAL and we cannot believe how things have kicked off today with the media interest over something we have known about for 4 months.
My wife, Maria, did not approach the press. The local paper found out that I had taken jobseekers allowance and phoned for a comment. Maria confirmed that it was true and they asked if I had a job to go to. She told them I didn't have a job and jokingly mentioned about "no accident/no incident" at Korean Air. We knew I had been rejected for an interview at Korean back in May/June and have accepted that this is their policy.
I "signed on" so that my NI stamp and national pension could be paid. I think I have paid enough tax over the years and surely the least I can ask for is that there is no stop in my NI contributions?
I chose to take VR based on numerous reasons that I will not talk about now, but the decision to take it was always knowing that I wouldn't be walking into a job. I chose to take a year's pay with the gamble that I would get a job within 12 months. I have learnt since Jan 08 not to just plod along but to live and enjoy life, and as a family we decided that leaving BA and having the security of 12 months pay was worth the gamble to find a job.
I have known that EK are not recruiting DEC for a little while now and happily changed my application from DEC to F/O. I'm sure no-one can be suprised that I intially applied for DEC? I have also applied to some other carriers as F/O. It is also no secret on this site that no-one is as of yet interviewing for F/O on the 777. (if you do know of anyone then let me know so I can tell the dole!).
I expected to leave BA at the end of Aug and have some months with the family. I need and want this time to relax with them. It is my impression that various airlines should start interviewing soon and I would like to think that I should get an interview as an F/O, even thinking like this, no job would start until 5-6 months from now.
I chose to take VR. I expected to not be flying again for at least 6 months. 3 weeks from leaving BA nothing has changed from my expected plan so why would Maria whine to the papers? We have seen a comment on a couple of the online papers that state that "our finances are so tight we may lose our house", then in a later paragraph it says "if Pete doesn't work then in Aug we may have to start thinking about selling the house". Today are finances are not tight. Last year was different, after a reduced wage for a few months we noticed our finances were stretched and maybe the first quote comes from then. The second quote is valid, but if I have a year's pay and didn't work in the 11 months from now until Aug, then there would be issues with my finances, but that would be the same for anyone. And I don't expect to not work in the next 11 months (whether this be in the air or on the ground).
I do not want anyone to think that Maria is whining about money, we are more fortunate with our finances than a lot of people, I walked away from a job with a payout, a lot of people are not so lucky. We took this gamble and we will see where the year takes us, but today we are happy and positive. I am thinking of attempting to do after dinner speaking and Maria and I are writing a book - but do you think we would be stupid enough to be so extreme in this that it shoots me in the foot to never being able to get another job?
Maria is taking on extra shifts in work as a Paramedic not for the money but because she enjoys it. At the moment she works 3 shifts a month, as I do the childcare and she had to work around my days off (I've 3 boys - 4,3,2). Now that I am home she can do extra shifts as I am free to have the boys anytime.
Some people will never understand why I took VR at 45 with no job to go to. Some people may one day decide to find out why I took it. All that matters to me though is that it was the right thing to do for the family as a whole, and things are going as expected. The papers have totally gone wild regarding KAL and we cannot believe how things have kicked off today with the media interest over something we have known about for 4 months.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 3433N 06912E
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm aware Peter took VR through choice.
I'm also aware that maybe he felt he had no choice.
The thread alludes to this.
Does it ?
When a Captain is apparently being undermined by so called SEP trainers to junior crew the rumour mill will kick in.........
What I see here (and I could be wrong) is an individual disgracefully treated by his management and even worse his CC colleagues who should have been supporting him.
His union's idea of support was drinks and a curry Where were they when BA started behaving badly? Where were they when the slanderous gossip started? I'm assuming Peter would have made them aware of this.
Where were they when BA started behaving badly? Where were they when the slanderous gossip started? I'm assuming Peter would have made them aware of this.
My point in my previous post was that Unite would have been far more pro active and supported him individually.
I'm think there would have been a legal case here.
For instance if Peter felt he had to leave because of the gossip/poor support from BA there could have been a case for constructive dismissal and slander??
I don't know of course
When you assume, it makes an Ass of you and 'Ume'.
as I'm no legal expert but Unite's legal dept are first rate....they would know.
If the media "line" was that Peter and his FO were heroes I make no apology for taking that. They were. They saved many lives that day
hero
Date: 14th century1 a : a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability b : an illustrious warrior c : a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities d : one that shows great courage
2 a : the principal male character in a literary or dramatic work b : the central figure in an event, period, or movement
3 plural usually heros
4 : an object of extreme admiration and devotion
Date: 14th century1 a : a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability b : an illustrious warrior c : a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities d : one that shows great courage
2 a : the principal male character in a literary or dramatic work b : the central figure in an event, period, or movement
3 plural usually heros
4 : an object of extreme admiration and devotion
They acted professionally. The crew are an example of how a professional crew work in difficult situation which resulted in a situation that was a lot less catastrophic than possible alternative outcomes.
