Flexicrew concerns
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Stockport
Age: 68
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most airlines are plc’s, their first duty of a plc is to its shareholders, what’s the catch phrase these days ‘shareholder value’. In the case of the airlines it is secondary that their business is operating aircraft and transporting passengers. The shareholders look to the CEO and his exec board to run the business in a way that provides them with a good return on their investment; in this instance one way to help increase that return is to accept that there are 1,000’s of folk out there willing to buy their way into the right hand seat of a shiny passenger jet.
Anyone who owns shares, and I suspect there may be some here who do
, will know you have certain expectations from your share ownership, that the company is seen as competitive and a good performer in its sector. This in turn will provide a growing share value and if you’re lucky a good dividend every quarter. You will expect that the business is run in a sustainable way in order to continue to deliver these benefits, but the chances are you’ll leave the CEO and his team to do what they see is best in their particular business.
Now it may well be that some way down the road there is a consequence to actions which help the bottom line this quarter and the next, but by and large we appear to becoming less focused on the distant future and more concerned with the short term. So is it any wonder that airlines want to continue to take advantage of all those people waiting to join their pay to fly schemes.
With both direct and indirect share ownership being so widespread these days we are all too some extent compromised because we as shareholders are driving this sort of behaviour in business. Is anyone really going to say that they are prepared to see their dividend payments halved in order that the company can do the ‘right thing’ and (in the airline example) take on cadets and fund their flight training for them?
That there appears to be a number of senior pilots in the system who are perhaps more willing to fight to maintain their own rights than look ahead and see where the industry is going, well this just helps the airlines to achieve their aim because as is quoted in the OP’s comments there are people who just don’t believe it is their problem; this leaves the airlines undistracted from quest to reduce costs in other ways.
I don’t think this type of issue is restricted to airlines/pilots, in fact far from it similar activity has been going on for years as management boards throughout industry seek ever more inventive ways to help prop up this year’s bottom line and at least it guarantees their performance bonus for another year. In truth the airlines are probably quite late to the game.
There will come a point at some point in the future when the cost of employing pilots reaches a rock bottom below which it just cannot go; at which time one can only wonder what the next target for saving money will be.
Anyone who owns shares, and I suspect there may be some here who do
, will know you have certain expectations from your share ownership, that the company is seen as competitive and a good performer in its sector. This in turn will provide a growing share value and if you’re lucky a good dividend every quarter. You will expect that the business is run in a sustainable way in order to continue to deliver these benefits, but the chances are you’ll leave the CEO and his team to do what they see is best in their particular business.Now it may well be that some way down the road there is a consequence to actions which help the bottom line this quarter and the next, but by and large we appear to becoming less focused on the distant future and more concerned with the short term. So is it any wonder that airlines want to continue to take advantage of all those people waiting to join their pay to fly schemes.
With both direct and indirect share ownership being so widespread these days we are all too some extent compromised because we as shareholders are driving this sort of behaviour in business. Is anyone really going to say that they are prepared to see their dividend payments halved in order that the company can do the ‘right thing’ and (in the airline example) take on cadets and fund their flight training for them?
That there appears to be a number of senior pilots in the system who are perhaps more willing to fight to maintain their own rights than look ahead and see where the industry is going, well this just helps the airlines to achieve their aim because as is quoted in the OP’s comments there are people who just don’t believe it is their problem; this leaves the airlines undistracted from quest to reduce costs in other ways.
I don’t think this type of issue is restricted to airlines/pilots, in fact far from it similar activity has been going on for years as management boards throughout industry seek ever more inventive ways to help prop up this year’s bottom line and at least it guarantees their performance bonus for another year. In truth the airlines are probably quite late to the game.
There will come a point at some point in the future when the cost of employing pilots reaches a rock bottom below which it just cannot go; at which time one can only wonder what the next target for saving money will be.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: U.K.
Age: 49
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for explaining your comments, however with such negativity to your employer ( I assume) it may well be time to look for pastures new, there are company's out there who offer more beneficial T&CS in return for your expertise, I've been in similar positions previously and yes your thoughts on things not changing are unfortunately probably true within your establishment, you have a choice though, there is an alternative life outside the four orange walls of easy land. With the upmost respect sir, I wish you well.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: UK
Age: 61
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks everyone for the input on this issue, I hope the momentum grows to somehow swing things back to a more sensible direction..as unlikely as it looks at present. Maybe some of this needs to go public so that the shareholders in the carriers concerned can see what the serious consequences of their are going to be for asking for returns on investment that seriously impinge safety...?
Last edited by AirResearcher; 24th Sep 2012 at 20:36.
''Not a chance in hell that FTL's will become better for pilots. It would simply cost too much''.
Not unless the costs of accidents becomes more. Remember Colgan?
Not unless the costs of accidents becomes more. Remember Colgan?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the early 60's, Flight magazine published my letter. I suggested that all airlines in the Uk (my focus at that time) should jointly fund an Air Acadamy. Places would be granted on the level of investment. Airlines would get graduate options on the level of investment. I was shot down for weeks. Hamble started a bit later, just for BOAC/BEA. BUA, Cambrian & BKS started limited sponsored schemes. But, it was starting to lift off.
Eagle were looking at a Cadet Scheme & so was Channel Express.
There was also the lovely (but of course, no longer cost effective) Short Service Commissions in the RAF, RN & even the Army Air Corps. The latter for only three years Service but Helicopter likely. There was something tantalisingly called the Beaver but I won't go there.
The "Self Improver" route was PPL, Asst. Instructor, Full Instructor & 700 hrs later, all the writtens for the shiny CPL. Tough part now would be twin conversion & I/R.
I , later, had another idea based on my first idea. A European Acadamy. My letter was published by Flight Magazine. I was shot down.
Fast wind, years later. Having succeeded in a fully sponsored course of Pilot Training & tucked up nicely with a Widebody Command I had another letter published by Flight Magazine bemoaning the demise of the fantastic sponsorship schemes, Hamble becoming a Council Housing Estate, minimum Service in the RAF now 16 yrs, no RN, Army available but only from within and the top end of the Self Improver route, financially, out of reach by most who set out on the route. I was shot down. Many re-acted more angrily than posters on the modern Pprune.
I wrote again ! This time I tried to shoot down a brave attempt by Britannia Airways to restart their own sponsored Pilot Training Scheme. The Selection requirements would have defeated most NASA Space Cadets & it was not, really, like the fully paid for sponsored schemes of the past. I was shot down by Brit & a few Doctors of Astronomical Physics who achieved the few places on offer.
I could see what was happening in the later years of my career. Training Organizations offering all sorts of P2F schemes. Of course the Airline Commercial depts would grab at these with no thought for safety. Dumbing down of school grades plus non selected pilots with wallets bulging (agreed, albeit, sometimes through innovative and admirable self funding routes). I don't get Flight Mag anymore but I wrote on Pprune a Post regarding the absolutely disgraceful marketing of the "BA FULLY Sponsored Cadet Scheme" which was nothing of the sort & nothing , remotely, similar to the heady days of the 60's. I was shot down. Mostly, by respondents, clearly identifyable, as those who put the scheme together in the first place.
I am in the process of writing to Martin & Richard in order to get them to fund a European Aviation Acadamy. Cadets will require balanced proof of a good all-round education which displays potential success at the academic licensing requirements. Selection will be vigorous. Graduation will lead to a guaranteed place in the airlines. Other airlines will be invited to fund & draw on the cadets in proportion to the level of funding. Oh, I will be Principal & live in a self designed property, on site. Eventually, we will open up courses to embrace all of aviation. There will be the Traffic School, Mechanic School,Cabin Crew School ( I will be Head of Cabin Crew Selection with Richard standing in, now and then ).
.......................I expect to get shot down.
As others have said; it will take a generation change & , more likely, a sever prang. But we, the benefactors of great times in the 60's through to the early 70's have done little to prevent this current tradgedy. I have run out of ink & been shot to pieces so many times..........I give up.
Eagle were looking at a Cadet Scheme & so was Channel Express.
There was also the lovely (but of course, no longer cost effective) Short Service Commissions in the RAF, RN & even the Army Air Corps. The latter for only three years Service but Helicopter likely. There was something tantalisingly called the Beaver but I won't go there.
The "Self Improver" route was PPL, Asst. Instructor, Full Instructor & 700 hrs later, all the writtens for the shiny CPL. Tough part now would be twin conversion & I/R.
I , later, had another idea based on my first idea. A European Acadamy. My letter was published by Flight Magazine. I was shot down.
Fast wind, years later. Having succeeded in a fully sponsored course of Pilot Training & tucked up nicely with a Widebody Command I had another letter published by Flight Magazine bemoaning the demise of the fantastic sponsorship schemes, Hamble becoming a Council Housing Estate, minimum Service in the RAF now 16 yrs, no RN, Army available but only from within and the top end of the Self Improver route, financially, out of reach by most who set out on the route. I was shot down. Many re-acted more angrily than posters on the modern Pprune.
I wrote again ! This time I tried to shoot down a brave attempt by Britannia Airways to restart their own sponsored Pilot Training Scheme. The Selection requirements would have defeated most NASA Space Cadets & it was not, really, like the fully paid for sponsored schemes of the past. I was shot down by Brit & a few Doctors of Astronomical Physics who achieved the few places on offer.
I could see what was happening in the later years of my career. Training Organizations offering all sorts of P2F schemes. Of course the Airline Commercial depts would grab at these with no thought for safety. Dumbing down of school grades plus non selected pilots with wallets bulging (agreed, albeit, sometimes through innovative and admirable self funding routes). I don't get Flight Mag anymore but I wrote on Pprune a Post regarding the absolutely disgraceful marketing of the "BA FULLY Sponsored Cadet Scheme" which was nothing of the sort & nothing , remotely, similar to the heady days of the 60's. I was shot down. Mostly, by respondents, clearly identifyable, as those who put the scheme together in the first place.
I am in the process of writing to Martin & Richard in order to get them to fund a European Aviation Acadamy. Cadets will require balanced proof of a good all-round education which displays potential success at the academic licensing requirements. Selection will be vigorous. Graduation will lead to a guaranteed place in the airlines. Other airlines will be invited to fund & draw on the cadets in proportion to the level of funding. Oh, I will be Principal & live in a self designed property, on site. Eventually, we will open up courses to embrace all of aviation. There will be the Traffic School, Mechanic School,Cabin Crew School ( I will be Head of Cabin Crew Selection with Richard standing in, now and then ).
.......................I expect to get shot down.
As others have said; it will take a generation change & , more likely, a sever prang. But we, the benefactors of great times in the 60's through to the early 70's have done little to prevent this current tradgedy. I have run out of ink & been shot to pieces so many times..........I give up.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: UK
Age: 61
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easyjet 2011 Risk assessment
EasyJet Annual Report 2011 - Principle risks
This is worth reading..... they were also advertising for a part time risk assessor a few weeks ago...which is interesting, possibly as I am led to believe their insurance premiums may have increased substantially recently, could this be in part related to their expanding use of flexicrews?
This is worth reading..... they were also advertising for a part time risk assessor a few weeks ago...which is interesting, possibly as I am led to believe their insurance premiums may have increased substantially recently, could this be in part related to their expanding use of flexicrews?
