swiss air + CRX Air = (swiss-lx)=0
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: guess where
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What he said is true.
Must be one of your own truthes.
BTW there is a fourth possibility for the management to solve the problem. Swiss light sounds good to me and you all could stick to your beloved old CLA without the 16 million benefits, have your own seniority list with the same risk for being sacked and you will not be forced to join the hated long range. Cause that was the only reason for you not to join a mainline, I guess.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All your comments are interesting but already well known. Is this the only strategy you guys can come up with? What about trying to find a solution, working for both sides, together? This IMO would show real professionalism.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: guess where
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tej
What do you expect us to do? To give voluntarily another 30% because we are all just nice guys. And with that being about 50% below benchmarked?
What would be your solution of the problem?
Of course there are a lot of emotions around. Everyone is scared of loosing any more.
As for professionalism. I am only trained to do a good job up front. And despite the fact that there is a lot of company stress around, I still do my very best to ensure safety. That is actually the only thing I can contribute to the present situation and for the sake of our company's health.
And sorry for mentioning the benchmarket again. But that is how it works all over the world.
I admit, you as a MD80 pilot (sorry for cheating, I was looking at your profile) should earn more. But the rest of your fleet is regional. According to benchmarket they earn too much already. Don't take it wrong. I do not begrudge anybody's salary or priviledge. But stop shooting at us. If you pay regional pilot the salary they are entiteled to get acc. benchmarket, there is more than enough for MD80 pilots to get the salary they should have. If CCP decides that the summ is devided equally, it's an internal problem. aeropers did the same thing. Decision was made that anybody gets the same acc. seniority. We could have done it otherwise and split middle and longhaul, but we didn't. Furthermore we are still paying a percentage of our salaries for not haveing to fire more fellow pilots. We took the chance to sign a contract which was painful enough, CCP decided to blow the whole thing.
As for senioritylist. According your productivity compared to ours you bring already some 200 pilots to many into the pot. Do you honestly think it's fairplay that we have to pay the dept again. IMO counting the years in service in either company is a fair solution. Some of you still keep the privilege being CMD after 3 years of service while ex-SR has F/O with 13 years. As for myself I won't be promoted for another decade. Nobody talks about takeing you this priviledge away.
So there will never be a win-win situation for anybody. But it must be fair for the major part of the employees.
I apologize for some harsh words in my previous posts, but when I am shot at, I shoot back.
What do you expect us to do? To give voluntarily another 30% because we are all just nice guys. And with that being about 50% below benchmarked?
What would be your solution of the problem?
Of course there are a lot of emotions around. Everyone is scared of loosing any more.
As for professionalism. I am only trained to do a good job up front. And despite the fact that there is a lot of company stress around, I still do my very best to ensure safety. That is actually the only thing I can contribute to the present situation and for the sake of our company's health.
And sorry for mentioning the benchmarket again. But that is how it works all over the world.
I admit, you as a MD80 pilot (sorry for cheating, I was looking at your profile) should earn more. But the rest of your fleet is regional. According to benchmarket they earn too much already. Don't take it wrong. I do not begrudge anybody's salary or priviledge. But stop shooting at us. If you pay regional pilot the salary they are entiteled to get acc. benchmarket, there is more than enough for MD80 pilots to get the salary they should have. If CCP decides that the summ is devided equally, it's an internal problem. aeropers did the same thing. Decision was made that anybody gets the same acc. seniority. We could have done it otherwise and split middle and longhaul, but we didn't. Furthermore we are still paying a percentage of our salaries for not haveing to fire more fellow pilots. We took the chance to sign a contract which was painful enough, CCP decided to blow the whole thing.
As for senioritylist. According your productivity compared to ours you bring already some 200 pilots to many into the pot. Do you honestly think it's fairplay that we have to pay the dept again. IMO counting the years in service in either company is a fair solution. Some of you still keep the privilege being CMD after 3 years of service while ex-SR has F/O with 13 years. As for myself I won't be promoted for another decade. Nobody talks about takeing you this priviledge away.
So there will never be a win-win situation for anybody. But it must be fair for the major part of the employees.
I apologize for some harsh words in my previous posts, but when I am shot at, I shoot back.
Last edited by what_goes_up; 6th Aug 2002 at 22:17.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Embedded in a pocket of resistance
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A legal contract is a legal contract and can not be changed by one party only.
Do you really think Aeropers would agree to further deteriorations in their contract?
Last edited by Robert Vesco; 7th Aug 2002 at 02:59.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: europe
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
be ready for a unilateral change in ´your´ contract, as managment has allready proven that it does not care much about little things like ´legalities´
The court verdict sais that in some points by signing the Aeropers GWA, Swiss broke the old CCP agreement. Nothing else. Now this does not mean that the Aeropers contract is illigal or not valid. And it certainly does not entitle Swiss to change its content unilaterally!
finalchecks: I never said the judge was stupid, I just said he has no clue about aviation. So please stick to the facts!
If, as you say, LX regional pilots do not ask for an MD11 salary, so why does CCP not accept the proposal of the management? MD80 salaries would be adapted, same vacation regulation and separated seniority. Everybody should be happy...
And because you wouldn't want to be privileged over your SR collegues, you would want to have a salary deduction for the 200 pilots that are too many and as well for the second Airbus corps you make necessary. Am I right? And because we are all the same - qualification and so - we delete the embarrassing exceptions in the standard of performance and kick out all those who are not speaking three languages according OM A 5 paragraph 2.2.2 and 2.4.1!
In a mreger as ours, there are always more loosers than winners. Sorry if CCP and the management made you believe something else, but it's not Aeropers' fault.
Now, instead of saying all the time how unfair you are treated, why don't you make any constructive proposals?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Embedded in a pocket of resistance
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh great, RV! If you profit, you don't care if it's legal or not. Now you show your true face...
Managment has placed itself into a difficult position, because on one hand they have a contract with Aeropers (the infamous B-GAV) which is hard to break/change, on the other hand they have a court verdict saying that the contents of this contract is discriminating and needs to be changed. I´m sure that the CCP does not want managment to make unilateral changes in ´your´ B-GAV, because this would open the way for Aeropers to go to an arbitration court. Then we get into a neverending cycle of courtcases without solving the problem.
The only way to break the deadlock is for Aeropers to dragged (kicking and screaming) to the negotiating table and make a fair contract for all parties involved.
Last edited by Robert Vesco; 7th Aug 2002 at 09:54.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Embedded in a pocket of resistance
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, one more thing,
It´s not a merger you dummy ! Sorry for my language here, but I assume that mreger = merger. If it is a merger then Crossair (now SWISS ) would be liable to that nice dept the SAir Group has accumulated in the last couple of years ! Do you still believe this "virtual bankruptcy" stuff that Jöhl was saying few months ago. Please !
For those who like to quote the business plan : look it up, it´s an expansion of Crossair, not a merger. Hence our claims towards seniority.
In a mreger as ours, there are always more loosers than winners.
It´s not a merger you dummy ! Sorry for my language here, but I assume that mreger = merger. If it is a merger then Crossair (now SWISS
) would be liable to that nice dept the SAir Group has accumulated in the last couple of years ! Do you still believe this "virtual bankruptcy" stuff that Jöhl was saying few months ago. Please ! For those who like to quote the business plan : look it up, it´s an expansion of Crossair, not a merger. Hence our claims towards seniority.
Last edited by Robert Vesco; 7th Aug 2002 at 09:52.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Godzone
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R.V.
and everybody else is led to believe it is a new airline, isn't it ?
Looks like an unfriendly take-over to me....
Emphasis on "unfriendly".
If you think along these lines, an awful lot of this nightmare, statements like some in this tread, actions and decisions become quite easy to explain.
In my book, both SR and LX were airlines belonging to a group (SAir group). The group went bankrupt. A new airline was formed, based on LX, with the emphasis on "based" !!!
The sky above Switzerland's not the same anymore, neither for former LX nor SR.
Welcome to reality !!!
and everybody else is led to believe it is a new airline, isn't it ?
Looks like an unfriendly take-over to me....
Emphasis on "unfriendly".
If you think along these lines, an awful lot of this nightmare, statements like some in this tread, actions and decisions become quite easy to explain.
In my book, both SR and LX were airlines belonging to a group (SAir group). The group went bankrupt. A new airline was formed, based on LX, with the emphasis on "based" !!!
The sky above Switzerland's not the same anymore, neither for former LX nor SR.
Welcome to reality !!!
Last edited by rapide89; 7th Aug 2002 at 10:58.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: europe
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RV: When you run out of arguments, you start to insult people. You must be a very intelligent man. But then, perhaps we are both wrong...
An expansion of Crossair by taking over 52 - or actually 54 - aircraft inclusive crew, procedures, dispatch, plannaing and so on... Well, doesn't sound very convincing to me - and neither does it to rapide89 or the governments of Belgium and France, it seems. Eventually the courts will decide - and it won't be a court in MS-owned Bâle! Probably we all have to hope they think that you are right - but I don't believe so...
Of course you never thought about giving up some of your unreasonable requests. I just wonder what ideas you have for a common GWA that is "fair for all parties". I'm still waiting to hear some proposals from CCP that are practical. Or are you still as unprepared as you were in spring, dreaming of flying the big planes and getting the big salary? It almost seems so, as I just heared that CCP withdrew from the talks in order to ask its members what they really want. Welcome to reality!
An expansion of Crossair by taking over 52 - or actually 54 - aircraft inclusive crew, procedures, dispatch, plannaing and so on... Well, doesn't sound very convincing to me - and neither does it to rapide89 or the governments of Belgium and France, it seems. Eventually the courts will decide - and it won't be a court in MS-owned Bâle! Probably we all have to hope they think that you are right - but I don't believe so...
The only way to break the deadlock is for Aeropers to dragged (kicking and screaming) to the negotiating table and make a fair contract for all parties involved.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Embedded in a pocket of resistance
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi skypointer,
Funny that you have so little faith in the structure of Swiss, especially because Aeropers has been such an important architect in designing the more controversial issues, like seniority. In the B-GAV seniority is distributed like it was in the bankrupt SAir Group because only this way Aeropers could ensure that the old statusquo, SR vs LX, would be maintained. Try and explain that to the Belgians and French ! Splitting up Swiss into a regional and long haul......again, it would look an awfull lot like the old SAir Group, wouldn´t it ? 
The way Aeropers has been part of this "unfriendly take-over" (thank you for mentioning that rapide89) is indeed jeopardizing the whole future of Swiss and I´m happy that you are enlightened enough to realize that.
Fair for me would be zipping the seniority lists. Any airline in the world has the rule that the last person in the company joins at the bottom of the seniority list. The CCP has stated that this would be unfair towards our ex-SR colleagues and proposed zipping the seniority lists. Even that was not enough for the greedy SR pilots as they wanted to be on top of the seniority list while joining a new airline. Another major point for me would be a fair pay scale for long and short haul flying. Forget about the mixed flying of A320´s and A330´s because this will no longer be a valid argument after Swiss has taken delivery of the A340´s, starting next year. Then you will see people flying long haul A330´s and A340´s (MFF) and people flying the short haul A319/A320/A321´s. Looking into the future, it would be wise to split up the pay scales into long haul and short haul. An A320 is clearly a short haul aircraft and belongs in OC1, no matter what you might want people to believe.
The CCP has proposed more practical solutions (like zipping the seniority lists) then you think, but maybe you should ask Jöhl about that ! It is obvious that you have received very poor and one sided information.
I´m sure that you will not like the outcome of this vote... Go ahead and fly your Airbus or MD11, thinking that all problems are over and Aeropers can afford not to renegotiate. Sweet dreams ! Remember, "keep the blue side up" (thanks for that free flying lesson BTW !) 
An expansion of Crossair by taking over 52 - or actually 54 - aircraft inclusive crew, procedures, dispatch, plannaing and so on... Well, doesn't sound very convincing to me - and neither does it to rapide89 or the governments of Belgium and France, it seems. Eventually the courts will decide - and it won't be a court in MS-owned Bâle!
The way Aeropers has been part of this "unfriendly take-over" (thank you for mentioning that rapide89) is indeed jeopardizing the whole future of Swiss and I´m happy that you are enlightened enough to realize that.
I just wonder what ideas you have for a common GWA that is "fair for all parties".
I'm still waiting to hear some proposals from CCP that are practical. Or are you still as unprepared as you were in spring, dreaming of flying the big planes and getting the big salary?
It almost seems so, as I just heared that CCP withdrew from the talks in order to ask its members what they really want. Welcome to reality!
Go ahead and fly your Airbus or MD11, thinking that all problems are over and Aeropers can afford not to renegotiate. Sweet dreams ! Remember, "keep the blue side up" (thanks for that free flying lesson BTW !)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: europe
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh my god, a couple of days on the road and then having to read this.
Studi, thanks for answering one question, that is clear. But have you tried to read the courts-verdict? It is not illegal to make a seperate agreement with AP, but it has to be a 'parallel vertrag' which it is not. FACT.
Ex-SR guys in general: you are talking about 200 pilots to many at ex-crx, but you know as well as I do that is not a fact. It is a asumption made by the AP-board. It does not account for the amount of capacity needed when training starts for the EMB-170, for instance.
It does not take in account the fact that a lot of ex-CRX crew make a lot of duty-hours DeadHeading, which is just something hard to avoid with four crewbases. At the same time I do not exclude that it is possible to gain some efficiency.
Also, the mentioned 45 block-hours/month is not a fact. Sure, it looked like that during the winter with the 'intermediate schedule' of the joint Crossair/Swissair booklet, but today, that is over.
Please stick to facts, read some papers and try to actually think.
Please excuse my english spelling and grammar, too long being around Heidi, piercings & facial hair is not very healthy for one's English.
Studi, thanks for answering one question, that is clear. But have you tried to read the courts-verdict? It is not illegal to make a seperate agreement with AP, but it has to be a 'parallel vertrag' which it is not. FACT.
Ex-SR guys in general: you are talking about 200 pilots to many at ex-crx, but you know as well as I do that is not a fact. It is a asumption made by the AP-board. It does not account for the amount of capacity needed when training starts for the EMB-170, for instance.
It does not take in account the fact that a lot of ex-CRX crew make a lot of duty-hours DeadHeading, which is just something hard to avoid with four crewbases. At the same time I do not exclude that it is possible to gain some efficiency.
Also, the mentioned 45 block-hours/month is not a fact. Sure, it looked like that during the winter with the 'intermediate schedule' of the joint Crossair/Swissair booklet, but today, that is over.
Please stick to facts, read some papers and try to actually think.
Please excuse my english spelling and grammar, too long being around Heidi, piercings & facial hair is not very healthy for one's English.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Godzone
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From A to B,
welcome back to reality, then.
Are you suggesting in earnest that you are productive as a passenger ? (Dead heading, as you call it). May be this crew base thing makes you more productive ?
Me thinks that you need a good night's sleep and then start thinking !!!
And, by all means, stay away from Heidi !
R.V.
Yes, indeed, CCP's proposals have struck me as enormously practical, lately.
Brilliant moves, all of them. Gaining time is the order of the day, it seems. What for ?
Let us all wait for the outcome of that vote, shall we ?
Cheers
welcome back to reality, then.
Are you suggesting in earnest that you are productive as a passenger ? (Dead heading, as you call it). May be this crew base thing makes you more productive ?
Me thinks that you need a good night's sleep and then start thinking !!!
And, by all means, stay away from Heidi !
R.V.
Yes, indeed, CCP's proposals have struck me as enormously practical, lately.
Brilliant moves, all of them. Gaining time is the order of the day, it seems. What for ?
Let us all wait for the outcome of that vote, shall we ?
Cheers
Last edited by rapide89; 7th Aug 2002 at 18:39.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: europe
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please read carefully man,
BECAUSE of the complicated system with four crew-bases with the different needs during summer/winter schedule and the differences in production per crewbase makes it difficult to be very efficient. There are a lot of rotations ZRH-destination-BSL and vice versa, wich involve DH. DH is valuable duty time waisted while you could be flying. It is the company having this system, we would like it to be changed as well. But, again, with four bases to be served in your beautifull country that is not easy. Rösti-border, capacity of ZRH, overflying right Germany, makes it like this.
So, the 200-man too many myth is out the door, I presume.
Maybe it is usefull to read the Times Magazine, this week's issue. Then you might realise that management has made a lot of errors, not CCP or AP. It is time for economical thinking, not Swiss-ego thinking.
BECAUSE of the complicated system with four crew-bases with the different needs during summer/winter schedule and the differences in production per crewbase makes it difficult to be very efficient. There are a lot of rotations ZRH-destination-BSL and vice versa, wich involve DH. DH is valuable duty time waisted while you could be flying. It is the company having this system, we would like it to be changed as well. But, again, with four bases to be served in your beautifull country that is not easy. Rösti-border, capacity of ZRH, overflying right Germany, makes it like this.
So, the 200-man too many myth is out the door, I presume.
Maybe it is usefull to read the Times Magazine, this week's issue. Then you might realise that management has made a lot of errors, not CCP or AP. It is time for economical thinking, not Swiss-ego thinking.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: guess where
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, the 200-man too many myth is out the door, I presume.
you are talking about 200 pilots to many at ex-crx, but you know as well as I do that is not a fact. It is a asumption made by the AP-board. It does not account for the amount of capacity needed when training starts for the EMB-170, for instance.
Then you might realise that management has made a lot of errors, not CCP or AP.
RV
Forget about the mixed flying of A320´s and A330´s because this will no longer be a valid argument after Swiss has taken delivery of the A340´s, starting next year. Then you will see people flying long haul A330´s and A340´s (MFF) and people flying the short haul A319/A320/A321´s.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: India
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As interesting as some of the contributions in this thread are, many seem to focus on whether or not to preserve the privileges of certain groups of employees, which is clearly an indication that "Swiss Intl Air Lines" is not a homogenous company but one that has been cobbled together to create another "Swissair" without the three last letters. No wonder then that cynics insist that "Swiss" stands for "So What - It's Still Swissair".
The big picture is that the company (Swiss Intl Air Lines) is facing problems that could be far greater than anything Swissair had to battle. "Swiss" cannot be a profitable concern because it's grossly oversized. It is the product of a political vision and not of a realistic business plan, and the result has been that whilst it was purported to be an integration of former "Swissair" into "Crossair", the fact is that the current behemoth is virtually a clone of former "Swissair", right down to the workplace agreements for ex-SR pilots (but not ex-Crossair pilots).
There is no denying that the current financial situation has been largely brought around by a blow-out in pilots' remuneration for ex-SR personnel, and there are only two ways to resolve any imbalance between expenditure and revenue:
- cut expenditure
or
- increase revenue.
As the latter is not an immediately available route, it's only the former that can work, and given that there is now a court ruling that essentially forces the company to largely treat ex-Crossair and ex-SR pilots as equals, the only way out is to reduce the packages for ex-SR pilots.
Instead of acknowledging this tough reality, the usual suspects within the Swiss establishment are now engaged in a massive publicity drive aimed at distracting from the fact that "Swiss Intl Air Lines" is fast becoming a major debacle of their very own making. It comes as no surprise that they have essentially identified the former Crossair pilots as scapegoats; after all, many of them are not Swiss nationals (as opposed to the situation among former SR pilots).
The fact that "Swiss" looks, smells and tastes like "Swissair" has also not escaped the attention of foreign courts, by the way. We might well see "Swiss" aircraft impounded in France soon.
The big picture is that the company (Swiss Intl Air Lines) is facing problems that could be far greater than anything Swissair had to battle. "Swiss" cannot be a profitable concern because it's grossly oversized. It is the product of a political vision and not of a realistic business plan, and the result has been that whilst it was purported to be an integration of former "Swissair" into "Crossair", the fact is that the current behemoth is virtually a clone of former "Swissair", right down to the workplace agreements for ex-SR pilots (but not ex-Crossair pilots).
There is no denying that the current financial situation has been largely brought around by a blow-out in pilots' remuneration for ex-SR personnel, and there are only two ways to resolve any imbalance between expenditure and revenue:
- cut expenditure
or
- increase revenue.
As the latter is not an immediately available route, it's only the former that can work, and given that there is now a court ruling that essentially forces the company to largely treat ex-Crossair and ex-SR pilots as equals, the only way out is to reduce the packages for ex-SR pilots.
Instead of acknowledging this tough reality, the usual suspects within the Swiss establishment are now engaged in a massive publicity drive aimed at distracting from the fact that "Swiss Intl Air Lines" is fast becoming a major debacle of their very own making. It comes as no surprise that they have essentially identified the former Crossair pilots as scapegoats; after all, many of them are not Swiss nationals (as opposed to the situation among former SR pilots).
The fact that "Swiss" looks, smells and tastes like "Swissair" has also not escaped the attention of foreign courts, by the way. We might well see "Swiss" aircraft impounded in France soon.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: europe
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, in my book it says that credit suisse and UBS bought the CROSSAIR stake out of the bankrupt SairGroup. They did not buy out the Swissair part, which can thus be considered as bankrupt.
By the way who came up with this foolish idea to expand Crossair with 26/26 aircraft (actually 27/27) and crew ex swissair? As you can read above this will never mix. If we would have continued like DAT in Belgium (fly a few profitable longhaul flights via codeshare and some a330s flown bij ex sabena crew) all swissair flightcrew would be on the street but the cantons (read: the people living in Switserland) would have saved a LOT OF MONEY.
This is a waste of time and an even bigger waste of money.
Good luck with your civilised airline.
(do not forget to take your nightstopkit when you go out flying as they might try to confiscate your aircraft)
By the way who came up with this foolish idea to expand Crossair with 26/26 aircraft (actually 27/27) and crew ex swissair? As you can read above this will never mix. If we would have continued like DAT in Belgium (fly a few profitable longhaul flights via codeshare and some a330s flown bij ex sabena crew) all swissair flightcrew would be on the street but the cantons (read: the people living in Switserland) would have saved a LOT OF MONEY.
This is a waste of time and an even bigger waste of money.
Good luck with your civilised airline.
(do not forget to take your nightstopkit when you go out flying as they might try to confiscate your aircraft)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: India
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
studi:
My apologies, I still owe you a reply to a posting you made a couple of days ago:
Yes, I'm Swiss, but have worked and subsequently lived in Asia for many years. I'm in the intertial navigation components and systems business,
Yes, I'm Swiss, but have worked and subsequently lived in Asia for many years. I'm in the intertial navigation components and systems business,
Last edited by Alpha Leader; 9th Aug 2002 at 05:48.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Have moved again
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thought this would make for some interesting reading!
[QUOTE]Weltwoche 2002 08 08, English
In the mess
Author Sepp Moser
Kept alive with billions but hardly viable. The rescue exercise for Swiss
clearly demonstrates one thing: the failure of politics.
Swiss politicians take their time before they start moving. But once they
do, they tend to behave irrational. It is in those situations that one can
observe what Walter Borner, Professor of Economics, describes a
characteristic of Swiss politics: "The hectic stagnation".
As a case in point one can mention the happenings around Swiss
International Airlines. For months the Federation and the Cantons behaved as
quiet shareholders of the new aviation group, which came into being out of
the collapsed Swissair and its small daughter-company Crossair. Now, in the
face of the continued fight about pilot's salaries, they suddenly cry out
loud.
President Villiger swears in anger "not to pump one more franc" into the
airline and offhandedly assigns the blame for the strong turbulences to the
Crossair pilots. On the other hand, National Councilor (SP) Susanne
Leutenegger sees this as a matter of the national government: "The federal
government has to take action if there is no agreement within the next two
weeks."
But just how and why, please? If politicians care now so much about the
fate of the airline, why did they not take a stand much earlier? Why did
they, in October 2002, write a check over two billion francs for a rescue
exercise whose chances for success were disputed already at that time? Why
did nobody intervene when President Dosé allowed salaries for the Swissair
pilots that were beyond the business plan? Why is today nobody talking about
the option of lowering the salaries of the Swissair pilots to the level of
the Crossair colleagues? And why is nobody irritated about Dosé's plan to
change the compromise verdict of the mutually accepted court of arbitration
regarding salaries, to the detriment of the Crossair pilots?
The Crossair pilots are not at fault
In the meantime even the "NZZ am Sonntag" is convinced that for the
forceps delivery of the airline Swiss, "political wishful thinking" was
stronger than economical facts. The situation of the group is now "more
difficult than ever". After a series of incidents it is considered to be
just "short of negligent how long the board already watches the drain of
trust in the safety areas".
Please note: This board is constituted largely of followers of business
tycoon Rainer E. Gut and Federal Councilor Kaspar Villiger who are friends
and have together initiated this rescue exercise.
For the record: Swiss cannot be profitable because it is far too big. The
salaries granted to the pilots of the bankrupt Swissair have destabilized
the expense budget. What is simply not acknowledged: The Crossair pilots
have by no means demanded more salary, but simply oppose to be paid less
than their colleagues, who would, without this rescue exercise, all be
without jobs. Te responsibility for this development lies with Gut, Villiger
and all those who, last autumn, kept Swissair artificially alive and had it
transformed into the Zombie Swiss. It is common knowledge that government,
as a principle, should refrain from such actions.
Basically all is as it was
Politicians now stand knee-deep in a mess. It becomes more and more
apparent that Swiss is nothing else than Swissair minus three letters; in
the business "Swiss" is meanwhile known to stand for "So what, it is still
Swissair". After all, Swiss uses Swissair's aircraft, staff, routes and
landing rights, the organization charts and procedures, and even the
Collective Labor Agreement for part of their pilots has been adopted nearly
verbatim. From the old Crossair, hardly anything is left.
Even judges start to notice these facts. In France, Air Liberté who was
shortchanged by Swissair to the tune of 87 million francs won a court case
for damages against Swiss. Two levels of appeal will follow. The recent
change in Frances government will allow for a more Swiss critical climate,
not the least because now also Mr. Ernest-Antoine Seillière who lost 400
million francs, has again good friends among civil servants and judges.
If only one of the French creditors should succeed in holding Swiss liable
as Swissair's successor, all walls will break. In at least two European
countries (not counting Switzerland) SAir creditors are planning to indict
Swiss - a vital threat to the Swiss Airline Group.
Under this viewpoint, the sudden hectic of the politicians only looks
logic. Because they start to fathom the risk of failure of this rescue
exercise, they now try in preventive damage control for themselves. They
look for scapegoats and found them - the Crossair pilots, who come in handy
to divert from the failure of the polititians.[QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Weltwoche 2002 08 08, English
In the mess
Author Sepp Moser
Kept alive with billions but hardly viable. The rescue exercise for Swiss
clearly demonstrates one thing: the failure of politics.
Swiss politicians take their time before they start moving. But once they
do, they tend to behave irrational. It is in those situations that one can
observe what Walter Borner, Professor of Economics, describes a
characteristic of Swiss politics: "The hectic stagnation".
As a case in point one can mention the happenings around Swiss
International Airlines. For months the Federation and the Cantons behaved as
quiet shareholders of the new aviation group, which came into being out of
the collapsed Swissair and its small daughter-company Crossair. Now, in the
face of the continued fight about pilot's salaries, they suddenly cry out
loud.
President Villiger swears in anger "not to pump one more franc" into the
airline and offhandedly assigns the blame for the strong turbulences to the
Crossair pilots. On the other hand, National Councilor (SP) Susanne
Leutenegger sees this as a matter of the national government: "The federal
government has to take action if there is no agreement within the next two
weeks."
But just how and why, please? If politicians care now so much about the
fate of the airline, why did they not take a stand much earlier? Why did
they, in October 2002, write a check over two billion francs for a rescue
exercise whose chances for success were disputed already at that time? Why
did nobody intervene when President Dosé allowed salaries for the Swissair
pilots that were beyond the business plan? Why is today nobody talking about
the option of lowering the salaries of the Swissair pilots to the level of
the Crossair colleagues? And why is nobody irritated about Dosé's plan to
change the compromise verdict of the mutually accepted court of arbitration
regarding salaries, to the detriment of the Crossair pilots?
The Crossair pilots are not at fault
In the meantime even the "NZZ am Sonntag" is convinced that for the
forceps delivery of the airline Swiss, "political wishful thinking" was
stronger than economical facts. The situation of the group is now "more
difficult than ever". After a series of incidents it is considered to be
just "short of negligent how long the board already watches the drain of
trust in the safety areas".
Please note: This board is constituted largely of followers of business
tycoon Rainer E. Gut and Federal Councilor Kaspar Villiger who are friends
and have together initiated this rescue exercise.
For the record: Swiss cannot be profitable because it is far too big. The
salaries granted to the pilots of the bankrupt Swissair have destabilized
the expense budget. What is simply not acknowledged: The Crossair pilots
have by no means demanded more salary, but simply oppose to be paid less
than their colleagues, who would, without this rescue exercise, all be
without jobs. Te responsibility for this development lies with Gut, Villiger
and all those who, last autumn, kept Swissair artificially alive and had it
transformed into the Zombie Swiss. It is common knowledge that government,
as a principle, should refrain from such actions.
Basically all is as it was
Politicians now stand knee-deep in a mess. It becomes more and more
apparent that Swiss is nothing else than Swissair minus three letters; in
the business "Swiss" is meanwhile known to stand for "So what, it is still
Swissair". After all, Swiss uses Swissair's aircraft, staff, routes and
landing rights, the organization charts and procedures, and even the
Collective Labor Agreement for part of their pilots has been adopted nearly
verbatim. From the old Crossair, hardly anything is left.
Even judges start to notice these facts. In France, Air Liberté who was
shortchanged by Swissair to the tune of 87 million francs won a court case
for damages against Swiss. Two levels of appeal will follow. The recent
change in Frances government will allow for a more Swiss critical climate,
not the least because now also Mr. Ernest-Antoine Seillière who lost 400
million francs, has again good friends among civil servants and judges.
If only one of the French creditors should succeed in holding Swiss liable
as Swissair's successor, all walls will break. In at least two European
countries (not counting Switzerland) SAir creditors are planning to indict
Swiss - a vital threat to the Swiss Airline Group.
Under this viewpoint, the sudden hectic of the politicians only looks
logic. Because they start to fathom the risk of failure of this rescue
exercise, they now try in preventive damage control for themselves. They
look for scapegoats and found them - the Crossair pilots, who come in handy
to divert from the failure of the polititians.[QUOTE]
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ZRH
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ich schreibe auf deutsch, da nicht die ganze Welt lesen muss, was wir in der SWISS für eine Schlammschlacht führen!
Ich bin Pilot bei SWISS OC2.
Ich denke bei OC1 haben einige Piloten den ernst der Lage noch nicht erkannt. Auch wenn Swissair bachab ging, auch wenn Crossair ausgekauft wurde, auch wenn Crossair alleine überlebt hätte, hätte es sicher nicht einen besseren GAV für die LX Piloten gegeben. Da aber Geld vom Bund und Wirtschaft in die LX gepumpt wurde, damit die ehemalige SWISSAIR Operation reduziert weiterbestehen kann, haben nun die Piloten von OC1 plötzlich das Gefühl sie seien die grossen Gewinner und wollen dies auch vergolden. Die Gewinnner sind sie eh, da sie ohne etwas spezielles zu leisten, die Chnace bekommen auf die Flugzeuge der ex-Swissair zu wechseln. ebenfalls sehen ihre Anstellungsbedingungen bedeutend besser aus als vor einem Jahr. Aber es braucht halt Geduld...
Da nun ab nächstem Sommerflugplan die Piloten von OC1 ebenfalls mit PBS geplant werden, ist die Zahl der Piloten in OC1 sicher um 1/4 zu hoch. Diese Rechnung wurde von SWISS bereits in einem Parallelrun mit PBS gemacht. Also würde sich die CCP besser darum kümmern, was mit den überzähligen Piloten geschehen soll. Man könnte ja ein Modell analog dem der AEROPERS einführen, damit jeder Pilot von OC1 eine Solidaritätsbeitrag bezahlt, um auf diese weise möglichst wenige Kollegen au der Strasse zu sehen. Es gibt überhaupt keinen Grund warum bei OC2 noch mehr gut Qualifizierte Piloten entlassen werden sollten. Aber es gibt bei OC1 sicher Piloten, welche nicht zur SWISS gehören. Denkt mal nach.......
Ich bin Pilot bei SWISS OC2.
Ich denke bei OC1 haben einige Piloten den ernst der Lage noch nicht erkannt. Auch wenn Swissair bachab ging, auch wenn Crossair ausgekauft wurde, auch wenn Crossair alleine überlebt hätte, hätte es sicher nicht einen besseren GAV für die LX Piloten gegeben. Da aber Geld vom Bund und Wirtschaft in die LX gepumpt wurde, damit die ehemalige SWISSAIR Operation reduziert weiterbestehen kann, haben nun die Piloten von OC1 plötzlich das Gefühl sie seien die grossen Gewinner und wollen dies auch vergolden. Die Gewinnner sind sie eh, da sie ohne etwas spezielles zu leisten, die Chnace bekommen auf die Flugzeuge der ex-Swissair zu wechseln. ebenfalls sehen ihre Anstellungsbedingungen bedeutend besser aus als vor einem Jahr. Aber es braucht halt Geduld...
Da nun ab nächstem Sommerflugplan die Piloten von OC1 ebenfalls mit PBS geplant werden, ist die Zahl der Piloten in OC1 sicher um 1/4 zu hoch. Diese Rechnung wurde von SWISS bereits in einem Parallelrun mit PBS gemacht. Also würde sich die CCP besser darum kümmern, was mit den überzähligen Piloten geschehen soll. Man könnte ja ein Modell analog dem der AEROPERS einführen, damit jeder Pilot von OC1 eine Solidaritätsbeitrag bezahlt, um auf diese weise möglichst wenige Kollegen au der Strasse zu sehen. Es gibt überhaupt keinen Grund warum bei OC2 noch mehr gut Qualifizierte Piloten entlassen werden sollten. Aber es gibt bei OC1 sicher Piloten, welche nicht zur SWISS gehören. Denkt mal nach.......