Thomson drops to new levels
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Europe
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thomson drops to new levels
Thomson is offering contracts to Canadian pilots (the recently laid off ex Skyservice guys) to start May 1st flying G registered, Thomson AOC A320s here in Europe to cover the loss of those Skyservice pilots WHILE some of the 90 odd pilots they recently served notice to in their own airline are still working said notice (a few are even A320 current). Either I am missing something or it is simply cheaper to payoff the few unfair dismissal claims from those without a new job against the losses that will be incurred with no reciprocal agreement with a (new) Canadian company (I am rather hoping it's the latter).
And while I am here any new pilots just starting out who wish to pay BALPA a monthly fee (if their 6 month contracts allow them to afford it), just take the cash and flush it down the toilet. It will amount to the same thing.
And while I am here any new pilots just starting out who wish to pay BALPA a monthly fee (if their 6 month contracts allow them to afford it), just take the cash and flush it down the toilet. It will amount to the same thing.
Gibblets, Surley Thomson cannot make guys redundant, then in the same breath take on contractors! I heard that the BALPA reps at TFly only made matters worse but this is crazy! Good Luck...
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Outrageous!!!
I mean this is just outrageous.
Why only offer jobs to Canadians? There's loads of qualified Europeans, or even British A320 pilots looking to stab someone in the back for work.......
Thomson Airways, hang your heads in shame.
Why only offer jobs to Canadians? There's loads of qualified Europeans, or even British A320 pilots looking to stab someone in the back for work.......
Thomson Airways, hang your heads in shame.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So angry
I back up Gibblets, it is true. I too would like to hear Thomsons justification for this. If they have current A320 pilots available who are still employed and serving their notice for redundancy how the hell can they employ Canadian pilots to work contracts on the A320!!!!!!!!! Someone tell me how this can happen????
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to roil the pot any more than it is... with the number of pilots redundant in the UK let along within the EU, would the UK issue work visas to the Canadian pilots?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a nice house
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allegedly its because Thomson want to keep the reciprocal agreement that involves its UK pilots going to Canada for the winter to fly the Canadian programme. Apparently if the Canadians don't come here, the UK pilots can't go there. More UK pilots go to Canada than Canadian pilots coming here, and without the Canadian contract this would mean that Thomson would make more UK pilots redundant. Apparently.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My question is....surely the so called reciprocal agreement was dead in the water as soon as the company involved in Canada went bankrupt? Aren't they making this up as they go along? I would love to know what an employment lawyer would make of that as their arguement!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Europe
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you may be right Airbus Girl but that doesn't justify the situation for the guys on notice at Thomson.
And I can confirm BALPA have co-signed the agreement from what I hear. Are they in bed with the management or something?!
And I can confirm BALPA have co-signed the agreement from what I hear. Are they in bed with the management or something?!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too am a redundant Pilot from Thomson, and support what the other guys have said.
While BALPA may have their hands tied on this occasion as the Management will take any excuse to force people out due to the summer/winter imbalance. I think the biggest problem is in a round about way the presedence is being set for summer contractors and it is apparent Management see this as the future ( and yet another career Airline down the drain..).
The union in Thomson have let down all junior F/O's with the lack of a right to return, keeping all Captains in their ranks, and now with little communication about how the union will help us redundant Pilot's back in to the company, I find myself asking where has my £40 per month got me and come the 30th April I will be gone and forgotten.
While BALPA may have their hands tied on this occasion as the Management will take any excuse to force people out due to the summer/winter imbalance. I think the biggest problem is in a round about way the presedence is being set for summer contractors and it is apparent Management see this as the future ( and yet another career Airline down the drain..).
The union in Thomson have let down all junior F/O's with the lack of a right to return, keeping all Captains in their ranks, and now with little communication about how the union will help us redundant Pilot's back in to the company, I find myself asking where has my £40 per month got me and come the 30th April I will be gone and forgotten.
Sounds like a dire situation.........still, i guess at least Thomson can still send more UK pilots out in winter 2010 to Canada to fly non-existent aircraft for a now defunct carrier......highly profitable and sure to safeguard those 50 jobs at risk without the tie-in !!!!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EGCC,
Yes you can ask and yes I have spoke to RM, who I have a great deal of respect for, and I am not persecuting BALPA, but they have done very little to help a junior F/O, unless you count those who have been offered a six month extension to their contract.
Looking at recent events: snow, ash, SSV and the impact they have had on the business etc you would expect a robust CC to be using this as an opportunity to gain back an advantage against a ruthless management, who quoted during the consultation 'we will not base our pilot establishment on assumptions'. Unfortunately this is not the case, and while to some extent compromise is necessary, to gain no ground is playing into the managements hands for future attacks. I agree with your comments re: right of return, however to be told you can leave your contact details, shows little regards for the efforts I have put into the company.
I genuinely believe right seat checking Captains gives the company greater flexibility, needing fewer F/o's for the quiet winter period as Captains will fill their shoes, which will delay the need to recruit full time First Officers, which is poor.
BALPA told us during the consultation period they were in negotiations, so what place does a 'shot gun to the head' have in a negotiation . . . . .
Yes you can ask and yes I have spoke to RM, who I have a great deal of respect for, and I am not persecuting BALPA, but they have done very little to help a junior F/O, unless you count those who have been offered a six month extension to their contract.
Looking at recent events: snow, ash, SSV and the impact they have had on the business etc you would expect a robust CC to be using this as an opportunity to gain back an advantage against a ruthless management, who quoted during the consultation 'we will not base our pilot establishment on assumptions'. Unfortunately this is not the case, and while to some extent compromise is necessary, to gain no ground is playing into the managements hands for future attacks. I agree with your comments re: right of return, however to be told you can leave your contact details, shows little regards for the efforts I have put into the company.
I genuinely believe right seat checking Captains gives the company greater flexibility, needing fewer F/o's for the quiet winter period as Captains will fill their shoes, which will delay the need to recruit full time First Officers, which is poor.
BALPA told us during the consultation period they were in negotiations, so what place does a 'shot gun to the head' have in a negotiation . . . . .
Last edited by frozenpilot; 17th Apr 2010 at 09:13.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a nice house
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really cannot start to know how you guys made redundant feel, other than to say I have been at the bottom of the list and under threat of redundancy previously.
The reciprocal agreement in Canada is to do with the Canadian authorities I believe (only from what I have read on the various sites etc.) and therefore the new plan is to send Thomson pilots to Canada this winter to support the new Canadian company. However, the Canadian authorities wouldn't agree to that if Canadian pilots were denied the right to come here this summer. If Thomson can't send their pilots over there this winter then those pilots are effectively surplus, and Thomson will reduce its permanent ranks by the same number - thus more redundancies.
As for the right to return, well, I believe its TUI and the Thomson directors/ managers that run the show, and as John Murphy (DFO) stated in his "roadshows" this winter, he doesn't want right to return therefore it won't happen. What are BALPA meant to do? They can make the point, but I doubt the current workforce would strike to try and force the company to change its policy, especially in the current climate. BALPA are not our employer!
Surely the anger should be aimed squarely at the Thomson Airways management team shouldn't it?
The reciprocal agreement in Canada is to do with the Canadian authorities I believe (only from what I have read on the various sites etc.) and therefore the new plan is to send Thomson pilots to Canada this winter to support the new Canadian company. However, the Canadian authorities wouldn't agree to that if Canadian pilots were denied the right to come here this summer. If Thomson can't send their pilots over there this winter then those pilots are effectively surplus, and Thomson will reduce its permanent ranks by the same number - thus more redundancies.
As for the right to return, well, I believe its TUI and the Thomson directors/ managers that run the show, and as John Murphy (DFO) stated in his "roadshows" this winter, he doesn't want right to return therefore it won't happen. What are BALPA meant to do? They can make the point, but I doubt the current workforce would strike to try and force the company to change its policy, especially in the current climate. BALPA are not our employer!
Surely the anger should be aimed squarely at the Thomson Airways management team shouldn't it?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North West, UK
Age: 56
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus Girl, spot on
I was told by RM on the phone this week that had it been blocked, 3 more airframes would have gone and another 50-70 on top of the 120 would of been axed.
Its a very bitter pill to swallow but thats life.
People should get their info correct before posting here.
Edited for correction of spelling and grammar as pointed out.
I was told by RM on the phone this week that had it been blocked, 3 more airframes would have gone and another 50-70 on top of the 120 would of been axed.
Its a very bitter pill to swallow but thats life.
People should get their info correct before posting here.
Edited for correction of spelling and grammar as pointed out.
Last edited by EGCC4284; 18th Apr 2010 at 01:08.