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

Norwegian B787 - LGW based

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.

Norwegian B787 - LGW based

Old 20th Jul 2015, 07:51
  #301 (permalink)  
Gender Faculty Specialist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Stop being so stupid, it's my turn
Posts: 1,709
Originally Posted by quadspeed View Post
Oh, that's easy dear chap . The customers perception of who is flying their airplane.

I thought I made that clear. But not to you it seems.

The bottom line is that some pilots like to be associated with a particular brand. And everything that goes with that.

As for 'most', then the best we can do is look at the numbers going from legacy to lcc, or the other way around. And after that, just let the numbers speak for themselves. I've done both, believe me, and so has most of my colleagues.
How patently sad. Luckily I don't need that kind of affirmation to make my life satisfying.
Chesty Morgan is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2015, 12:58
  #302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: crewbag
Age: 47
Posts: 293
Originally Posted by Chesty Morgan View Post
How patently sad. Luckily I don't need that kind of affirmation to make my life satisfying.
I think that's wonderful and I wish you nothing but the best. If everybody wanted to fly legacy there would be nobody to haul sh1tfaced Scousers to ibiza for the weekend.

Different strokes for different folks. Pay me enough and I'll even haul rubber dogsh1t out of Hong Kong. Oh wait. I already do that.
quadspeed is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2015, 13:22
  #303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: crewbag
Age: 47
Posts: 293
Originally Posted by TowerDog View Post
Don't need the status and recongnition of a major airline, but the benefits are great.
And I agree with you TD that the status and recognition that comes with a major airline doesn't itself put food on the table or keep the neighbor out of my bed half the month.

But it does provide me with first class travel, a decent retirement cushion and a standard of operation that goes beyond the regulated minimums. I fly with colleagues who have chosen to be here as opposed to wishing they were somewhere else. The flying doesn't leave much to the imagination and the greens take me from the runway to the gate to the bed, but at the end of the day I'm left with enough time and cash to jump in the two seater parked in a hangar a short drive away if I ever feel the need.

You've tried both worlds and creds for choosing the glove that fits the hand. I know guys who have gone from legacy to lcc at their own choosing and never looked back. But let's be honest about it; they're the exception rather than the rule.
quadspeed is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2015, 14:35
  #304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: France
Age: 42
Posts: 16
Come on

Gents,

I think we get a litte of Topic here. It is so simple, Not all of US have the choice.

There Are Pilots Out their, that have been employed with major carriers for a Long Time (Sabena for Example). Since the Company went bust, I know a guy who went through 7 insolvencies! So what, Are they worse pilots? of course Not!
but they just don't have the choice! What about if you have worked As a Cpt for Ten years and your Company goes titts up? You have nearly no Chance with the Major Airlines in Europe, it is more then great, that companies like Norwegian give you the Chance! Happy for everybody, who is in a Lucky Position, high seniority with a Legacy, or Major Airline, great, but Not everybody can choose, don't forget this!

I Miss some airmenship every now and then in this Forum!

happy Landings, to all of you
Zapper27 is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2015, 16:13
  #305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Eurozone
Posts: 150
Zapper,

You are barking up the wrong tree here mate. In the UK, anyone not in the upper echelons of a legacy seniority list is considered a lesser being and if they suffer redundancy, then it is exactly what they deserve for not being one of the chosen ones. Nothing to do with luck of course, the blessed ones were individually chosen by god to be superior to everyone else and it is their sacred duty to rub our noses in it.

You sentiments are appreciated and mirror my own.

Merci and bon chance.
zeddb is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2015, 15:25
  #306 (permalink)  
fade to grey
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
If you want to join a legacy carrier then go do it, but make sure you are young.

We had guys join big airways from my last outfit on the clapped out 767 . As they know it's 400 years to a shot at command, big airways tries to keep them interested by coming up with courses for them with names such as ' diversity in the cockpit with applied shamanism ' or some such stuff.
Not only that their rosters are sh.....not good, as there are 120,000 pilots above them on the seniority list.

Can't see the attraction if you're over 30. But then again I never had much patience .
 
Old 23rd Jul 2015, 07:53
  #307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: France
Age: 42
Posts: 16
Improved conditions

Gents,

Anybody nows the improvement on the Pay for RCA and FO's?

I guess the number that Fade to Grey poseted earlier was for CPT's!?

Cheers
Zapper27 is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2015, 22:07
  #308 (permalink)  
fade to grey
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Really, do some research before you start talking sh.....rubbish .

The bank involved is one of the largest in the world .
It's not some conspiracy between the banks, Rishworth and aliens .
 
Old 24th Jul 2015, 03:09
  #309 (permalink)  
Gender Faculty Specialist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Stop being so stupid, it's my turn
Posts: 1,709
So was the Royal Bank of Scotland.
Chesty Morgan is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2015, 03:48
  #310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: High n Blighty
Posts: 114
Fade, we appreciate your opinions on your experience of Norwegian. Even though you had little choice with your decision.

I don't share your vitriol agains being in BA, it was the place to be and may well still be.As conditions of service in BA have fallen, those offered by the rest have plummeted. Except in Asia.

Interestingly, we never hear of Virgin pilots leaving. They must now be considered No.1
The Crew is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2015, 09:29
  #311 (permalink)  
fade to grey
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
No vitriol.
I'm merely giving my impression of why it wouldn't be of interest . If your under 30 I imagine it would be.

I agree Virgin pilots don't seem to be unhappy with their lot
 
Old 24th Jul 2015, 09:30
  #312 (permalink)  
fade to grey
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
And of course , you always have a choice.
Especially when you are dealing with a large chunk of your own money
 
Old 24th Jul 2015, 14:19
  #313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 272
fade to grey quote:

"The bank involved is one of the largest in the world. It's not some conspiracy between the banks and Rishworth"

It is implausible in the extreme to suggest the above condition makes the Norwegian up-front payment scheme both ethical and legitimate, even less so due to the involvement of New Zealand based Rishworth, via their Sweden office and Crawley UK, broom cupboard affiliate.
Direct Bondi is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2015, 00:44
  #314 (permalink)  
fade to grey
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
We are getting nowhere here.

/ I merely pointed out there is no shady deal between rishworth and a bank owned by rishworth . This is incorrect and into the realms of conspiracy theory . I offer no opinion on the ethics or anything else of the deal.

/ wannabes and their parents will not be on the street due to securing loans on their houses. We don't take wannabes, you need to be an experienced Boeing pilot ( or Airbus ) to go on the 787.

/ I'm not trying to persuade people to join , I don't care either way. I only posted here to r redress some of the bull being spoken as I am party to the actual reality.
 
Old 25th Jul 2015, 14:20
  #315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 272
The actual reality is a circumvention and misrepresentation scheme.

The Norwegian Airline Group recruits, interviews, hires, determines the base, roster, days off, vacation, promotion opportunities, layoffs and may also terminate pilots and cabin crew. By EU law definition, Norwegian is the employer.

Pilots and cabin crew working for Norwegian in the UK are not working under the UK Employment Act 2008. As such, they have no claim whatsoever against Norwegian in any employment dispute. Nor do they have the right to union representation or collective agreement with Norwegian.

Pilots and cabin crew in the UK employed by an agency, are working under the Agency Workers Regulations 2010. Although Norwegian may have misrepresented itself as the "employer" on crew airport ID badges and US visa applications.

Since the March 31, 2008 effective date of the EU US Open-Skies Agreement, 57 EU carriers have applied and been granted US Permits. The average time between application and granting the requests was 55 days. After 15 months, the longest time of any application, the DOT is no closer to granting NAI its permit. Serious concerns remain regarding Norwegian's circumvention of employment rights and principles.

Several weeks ago Kjos boasted in the Norway press that he did not need the US Permit - link:
- Vi kan fly til krampa tar oss med de tillatelsene vi har - DN.no
* copy and paste to Google Translate

More recently, Kjos has written a begging letter to DOT Secretary Foxx pleading for the US Permit - link:
Kjos frir til Obama for f trafikkrettigheter i USA - Aftenposten

In reply to the Kjos letter the Secretary of the European Transport Workers Union, Francos Ballastero, stated:

"In an attempt to pursue the policy stated in the employment agreement, the Spain based pilots have organized themselves under SEPLA, the Spanish pilots union, and have made repeated attempts to engage Norwegian or representatives of Norwegian, for the purposes of constructive talks. For the past six months these repeated attempts have been completely ignored by Norwegian. As a reply to these efforts made by the pilot representatives, Norwegian has stated it does not have any pilots in Spain, but an agency called OSM does"

Article 17 of the current US-EU Air Transport Agreement, Open-Skies, states: "The opportunites created by the Agreemnt are not intended to undermine the labor standards or the labor related rights and principles contained in the Parties respective laws"

Norwegian categorically does not meet the prerequisite requirement of Article 17. A US Permit cannot be granted.
Direct Bondi is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2015, 16:14
  #316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: I wish I knew
Posts: 610
Aren't all the NLH crew now UK based? and if so, they will be subject to UK agency employment laws , in this respect, I fail to see what the 737 Pilots based in Spain have to do with the NLH DOT application, Incidentally, the Spanish are no blueprint for labour relations given their record of airline strikes and ATC strikes.. which brings me to the next point, if they are so unhappy in Spain, why don't they strike as usual.. answers on a postcard!

Last edited by Avenger; 25th Jul 2015 at 18:27.
Avenger is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2015, 22:41
  #317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 272
Agency pilots and cabin crew have no labor rights nor labor principles with their real employer, Norwegian - para 2 above (e.g. union representation and collective agreement).
If the Spanish agency pilots were to strike against Norwegian they could be summarily terminated without recourse. In a "direct employment relationship" striking pilots cannot be terminated without due process (recall the 600 directly employed pilots on strike in March). In the UK the difference between the Employment Act and the Agency Workers Regulations - right to strike vs immediate dismissal.
Kjos does not mind if agency pilots join one or ten unions, he has no obligation to communicate or even acknowledge any agency union, as evidenced by SEPLA's failed attempts.
The Kjos labor scheme circumvents the prerequisites of Article 17. Additionally, Kjos has stated in his application to the US DoT that agency crew are offered the same degree of job protection, terms and conditions as crew hired directly by Norwegian - they are not.
Direct Bondi is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2015, 22:53
  #318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: california
Age: 61
Posts: 303
Avenger- the right to strike is a Human right in all western democracies. Circumventing the right to strike is a privalage restricted to Authoritarian states. Europe is currently going through a transitional phase which allows loopholes to emerge for unscrupulous employers to exploit. Fortunately the U.S. government are preventing this exploitation from being a commercial advantage.
polax52 is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2015, 08:43
  #319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: I wish I knew
Posts: 610
Polax, Bondi, I am not talking about the right to strike or instant dismissal for industrial action or anything remotely connected to that topic. My comments, in specific connection to the NLH thread are simply this: The vast majority of the crews seem happy with their lot, the LGW LH crews are not up in arms over pay and working conditions, that privilege seems to be reserved for observers that don't even work for the company, are vocal about never wanting to work for the company and seem to take the opinion that if they don't want to work there, no one else should either..The thread has been contaminated by reference to the Spanish operations and every other aspect of NAS working conditions, which has absolutely nothing to do with the original topic. The concept of obtaining a commercial advantage by effectively having " slave labour" is not supported by the positive attitude displayed by the workforce themselves, and to be honest, is starting to smell of sour grapes. The US DOT are past masters of putting fingers in everyone else's pies and perhaps should exercise some of the "freedoms" they seek so hard to protect..

The crux:

They and the U.S. airline-pilots union
accuse Norwegian of seeking to set up a low-wage operation with foreign crews that will create unfair competition. ( Nonsense, of course the crews are "foreign" all European airlines operate with a mix of crew, people have the basic human rights to live in their own country.)

The salaries and benefits of pilots in the Irish long-haul subsidiary are “substantially inferior” to those of its Norwegian-based pilots, ALPA claimed.( Really! not according to the published pay scales seen here and given the cost of living index UK vs Norway http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living...United+Kingdom)

A joint filing from American, Delta and United likewise argues
Norwegian’s application to operate as an Irish carrier is merely “a flag of convenience. to avoid Norway’s labor laws and lower labor costs … thus giving (Norwegian) a competitive advantage on transatlantic routes in direct competition with U.S. carriers.” What has Norways labour laws got to do with British based pilots?

Last edited by Avenger; 27th Jul 2015 at 09:10.
Avenger is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2015, 10:36
  #320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: california
Age: 61
Posts: 303
Nice post Avenger but employing Pilots through agencies when they are clearly employed by one employer in a full time job is done unfairly and for a reason. The reason is to circumvent basic western human rights. Honestly it could not be more simple.

Even David Cameron, a Thatcherite conservative has spoken very vocally and clearly against this type of employment. Meeting DOT requirements is so easy.
polax52 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.