Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Terms and Endearment
Reload this Page >

Ryanair/Brookfield new contracts

Terms and Endearment The forum the bean counters hoped would never happen. Your news on pay, rostering, allowances, extras and negotiations where you work - scheduled, charter or contract.

Ryanair/Brookfield new contracts

Old 29th Nov 2011, 17:04
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Brazil
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ryanair/Brookfield new contracts

Hi Colleagues

In totally new here, so bear with me if this has been posted somewhere else....


Just got rumors of the new Ryanair/Brookfield contract, that in case of ect. track violations, breach of night curfew, noise abatement.... that the contractor is liable to pay for that and if you don not sign, you will be terminated

Anyone heard similar rumors ?

Monsterman is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2011, 17:39
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: The moon
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you join REPA/IALPA you will have your question answered
Johnny Tightlips is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2011, 20:35
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just got rumors of the new Ryanair/Brookfield contract, that in case of ect. track violations, breach of night curfew, noise abatement.... that the contractor is liable to pay for that and if you don not sign, you will be terminated
If true this is a new low for FR
bluearrow is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2011, 22:00
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Eire
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This liability section has been in all brk contracts since 3 years ago.
This is the sort of stuff we are fighting against you need to be part of a union join IALPA join REPA things have gone way too far there is only one way out.
widered is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 06:38
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would like to see the Brookfield contract.

Is it possible, that any of you could send it to me.

100% discression.
SE210 is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 07:39
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The IMF.
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What a load of sh1t this outfit is.
Narrow Runway is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 09:16
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Did the guys in Ciampino get the bill, or did Mikey try & find the owners of the birds ?
captplaystation is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 09:30
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Built4speed,

Lets assume that the curfew story is as straightforward as crewdock described (I know it is a simplification to say that in RYR).

Why shouldn't the crew be liable for the fine?
WallyWumpus is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 09:46
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Why shouldn't the crew be liable for the fine?
Maybe because the level of fine is set at a figure considered suitable as a penalty to be taken at an operator level, similar figures generally could wipe out an employee financially....the operator can certainly take action against said offender if found to be in error, but i would have thought the correct response would be to undergo any required re-training, assessment and all being well, monitoring of future performance in line with company SOP's, etc.. If more occurences occur, maybe something needs addressing with the crewmember concerned - after all, we are all human and prone to mistakes and are complicated machines in our own right. Oh, and the individual makes nowhere near the profit the company makes, therefore with all i've said before, the company i'm afraid in my opinion have to accept that mistakes will and do happen.
First.officer is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 10:33
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,982
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Wonder how the RMT would react if the train companies had contracts which said that train drivers were personally liable in the event of accident etc?
fireflybob is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 10:56
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
F/O,

You are right, the first line of response to a flight crew error should be a supportive assessment of the facts, and then re-training as required to minimise the chances of any re-occurance. I agree fully with this for errors.

How about willful negligence by the crew? Using this example to illustrate my point (and I am NOT saying this is what actually happened), if the crew knew they would miss the curfew, they were at the end of their duty week and they were motivated SOLELY by a desire to reduce personal inconvenience should they not pay the fine?

If I take the fire-axe to all of the screens in the aircraft should I not be personally liable for the costs?

Is the danger of what I am saying that it represents a thin-edge of the wedge? Probably. Do we (as flight crew) have the justifiable fear that there would never be a process that we could have confidence in to be impartial in judging the difference between willful negligence and an accident? Absolutely, God-forbid that should ever be RYR running that process.

The world is not as black and white as I would like it to be. I have not, to date, heard any reasons put forward as to why that crew, on that day, should not pay the fine. My ears and my mind remains open.
WallyWumpus is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 11:05
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,982
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
In this case, it would be interesting to know how much this crew saved Ryanair in costs for not having an aircraft out of base in the event of diversion!

Not saying I necessarily agree with the crew not complying with the curfew but sometimes it's cheaper to pay the fine - maybe the Commander made the correct decision based on analysis of the data?
fireflybob is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 11:20
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The problem with this line of argument is that it requires us to assess how much commercial intelligence RYR want us to display. I do not know the answer to that question, but I suspect that given we are all assimilated Borg-like into the airline, "not-much" would probably cover it.

In my experience, the handling agents are generally good at answering radio calls. If the crew called them, the agents could then call Dublin and get an answer for them in advance of the approach. I have no idea if this happened. Crews should take 'reasonable' steps to protect their positions.

Trying to argue that the cost and inconvenience of a coach journey, plus an a/c out of base for first wave the next day (cost unknown to the flight crew), versus a fine for an after-curfew landing (cost unknown to the flight crew) would be a difficult position defend in any subsequent meeting.
WallyWumpus is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2011, 11:44
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,982
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Trying to argue that the cost and inconvenience of a coach journey, plus an a/c out of base for first wave the next day (cost unknown to the flight crew), versus a fine for an after-curfew landing (cost unknown to the flight crew) would be a difficult position defend in any subsequent meeting.
Wally, I agree entirely.

I was just making the point that, commercially speaking, it might be worth paying the fine. Of course, if the Company says they are happy taking the hit I would want to have that in writing and/or over the radio with witnesses listening!
fireflybob is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2011, 14:14
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In t'sky
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm with Wally on this one actually. It's written ALL OVER the PLOG, and the Airfield brief, that you must NOT break curfew. We are constantly reminded of it. Why then a Captain should take it upon himself to land after curfew I don't know - especially since we have no based aircraft at BVA so I don't think he would have been able to take off anyway.

It's the same thing with noise violations. Whilst I don't particularly agree with individuals taking the financial hit for these "irregularities", I would expect a severe dressing down for said flight crew. We are actively encouraged to report anything out of limits noise wise (LNAV dropped out, loss of comms, etc) to cover our asses when the Spanish or whoever come after us. If you have some reason that compels you to land or deviate, then do so but file a report afterwards and they can't really come at you.

On a lighter note, why not just land in CDG? That's always open
MrHorgy is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2011, 10:17
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Built,

I have seen nothing on REPA, nor have I heard a single pilot argue that people should not be liable for willful negligence. Do you?

By all means fight for a fair and proper process to protect all parties, and by all means be sceptical about anyone's ability to achieve this, but are you genuinely seeking immunity for all and any of your actions within RYR? I'm not.
WallyWumpus is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2011, 13:03
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If it is printed all over the Nav-Log, and was a destination the Capt was familiar with, difficult to believe they didn't know about the night curfew.
Just to clarify, was he fined for the arrival in BVA , or a subsequent departure ?
If the aircraft arrived & was stuck there due airfield closure he saved them diddly squat, & had he diverted to Lille (or whichever far flung alternate you guys use nowadays) at least he could have subsequently departed. I guess if the curfew applied on arrival he was stuck, if it was on departure wasn't the airfield closed? Also difficult to imagine why, short of him declaring an emergency, ATC didn't advise him of his intended transgresion. Finally if he departed elsewhere with the intention of landing in BVA, & they were a bit tight for time, why weren't they planning for a diversion early on in the flight as the FMC showed an arrival a little bit too late with the attendant possibility to be stuck there ? Handling in BVA were one of the better ones when it came to answering the radio, so difficult to imagine how he could have inadvertently arrived without knowing the possible consequences, unless both up front hadn't read the Nav Log / Airfield brief at all.

As to the fairness of the companies actions . . . . . . what has fairness got to do with it ?
If, year after year, you continually accept erosion of T & C's ,& bury your heads in the sand, what is there to complain about when someone shafts you from behind yet again. The day you guys collectively grow a pair & see beyond the end of your snouts ,scavanging for crumbs in your own personal troughs, will be a sea change for all of us, as historically what happens to you, filters its way down to the rest of us in the fullness of time.
I am long past being surprised by ANY action/conditions RYR imposes on its pilots, this is just another to add to the long & ignimonious list.
If you had all supported Martin Duffy all those years ago, perhaps he wouldn't have to try to support you , in supporting yourself, now.
You are , finally, a sad bunch of sheep, perhaps not individually, but collectively.
Get the flock out of there ! !

Last edited by captplaystation; 11th Dec 2011 at 13:31.
captplaystation is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2011, 14:11
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: -
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Agreed Captplaystation, all very true. Its a horrible set up in Ryanair. Divide and conquer tactics imposed by management promotes selfishness. Short term summer contracts to get home for a while,accepting floating positions 'for the money' which promote a lack of unity,going BRK to earn 15000 more per year while swindling the tax man in iom,gibralter,malta etc,accepting terrible terms because 'im near home'(until the base closes/downsizes),people trying any approach to get a base,plugging man power deficiencies and working off days 'for the money'(ryanair then spew the 'no crewing issues' mantra and don't have to improve the terms because they have 'enough pilots' and can continue the status quo)...on and on and on

Nobody in Ryanair has a common goal.Look at BA for example. Everyone on the same or similar terms as seniority rises. A common cohesive body. In ryanair you have 48 different full time contracts or 'negotiated base agreements'(ha ha), a brk floating contract,an old brk contract, a new brk contract with accountants, a new new brk contract just launched, temporary summer contracts (and then no guarantee to get back to your original base), temporary winter contracts etc etc.

And thats just the pilots. Its worse for engineers and cabin crew. Amazing tactics.Most people are too stupid to see it..not savvy enough for this management i'm afraid. Just the type of people ryanair love to exploit. The needy selfish kind with no understanding of the crucially important word - loyalty. We know modern day corporations have no loyalty towards their staff however to fight this the staff have to be loyal to each other,its inexplicable not to be in this aggressive environment in which we work.
leeds 65 is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2011, 18:09
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Utopia
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Join IALPA.

Nuff said.
737 Jockey is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2011, 20:07
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: FL400
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Grow a pair? Easy to say from behind the anonymity of the internet.
Would you say that in person to a Ryanair pilot? I'd like to see that happen...
Al Murdoch is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.