Doug

Go bang your drum at the doorstep of the baby guys who are looking for jobs with FR AFTER their great unionized company made them redundant.

When you have beaten the retreat there, turn your attention to the unionized Thomson Fly and the pilots there who will be made redundant.

If you have any energy left, beat the retreat at LHR for the unionized bmi guys, shafted by their own union, looking for work.

Take your union and get it in order before you come round here shouting your mouth off about people in secure, well paid jobs.

Ask not what BRK can do for you, ask WTF has BALPA done for easy / bmi / baby / Thomson / Virgin / Excel / Silverjet.

And Coppi.....how on earth can you be pleased that BALPA has yet again let down the members and even more will be redundant?

Do you get some perverted pleasure in this ? Are you of the Scargill / Red Robbo mentality ?

To be perfectly honest, if I was made redundant from my current airline I too would be grateful for a job at BRK/Emirates/Etihad/Qatar/Vietnam/FR/China/Africa to keep paying the mortgage.

That however doesn't change the fact about the poor BRK salaries, horrible working conditions and management non-ethos at BRK/FR.

Sadly, other airline AMBs are learning fast from their teacher Leo-Hairy-Camel, aided by former apprentices like Warwick Brady to pass on the gospel.

Soon Leo will be quoted in MBA courses I am afraid!

I am not familiar with the sort of mentality you mention, but I am sure it is one of your attributes.

Far be it from me to be glad about the misfortunes of others.

I said I am proud of my union, however imperfect they may be.

Apart from slandering posters when they come up with facts that don't suit your version of "reality", any comments about the Fantastic salary opportunities @ FR/BRK?

By the way, Balpa also work in lobbying MP's and policymakers and with Airline Industry issues in general, another reason to be a proud member!

Coppi, I don't think your belt is going through all the loops and your aerial certainly isn't picking up all the channels.

You are PROUD of a union that negotiates job losses?

You are PROUD of a union that facilitates the exploitation of CTC cadets at easy?

You are PROUD of a union that negotiates redundancies at bmi / baby / Thomson / Virgin ?

Are you PROUD of a union that can't be relied upon to uphold scope agreements ?

Are you PROUD of union that won't provide legal assistance to members - Arkwright et al ?

Are you a NIMBY ?

Your myopia is breathtaking !

Ah Slim - how touching. It turns out everyone at Ruinair just loves having their pay docked. How foolish of me to think people wanted to actually earn money rather than have it taken away. I am simply delighted for you all that the compulsory 'adjustment' to your leave arrangements has been so worthwhile. Perhaps you should speak to your representatives (if you have any) and arrange for a further month's pay to be deducted to increase the pleasure of the experience even more.

Calling all Orange peelers lets cut the @@@' and stand shoulder to shoulder with Balpa. Period.

Why on earth are you so astonished?

After all you are proudly serving your master Leo/Mol, so I think being a proud member of a worker's union is much less peculiar than your predicament!

However, as I sense that conversing with you about anything is completely pointless and an utter waste of my valuable time and because I have completely lost hope in getting a sensible reply about the fantastic ruinair/BRK remuneration opportunities, I 'll leave it to you to think about it for a while.

Who knows you might even come up with a plausible version, although I won't lose any sleep over it!
The truth often hurts but believe me it is the key to seeing the light!

Being made redundant, or a company going bust, is a part of life and it could happen to any company, big or small, unionized or not.

We already discussed the "well paid" portion above, that is a very relative concept depending on;

1) how thick the blindfold is (that gross salary ≠ net salary is obviously a mathematical challenge for some "well paid" FR pilots...)
2) how deep you want to bend over for your corporate master (application fee + type rating + medical + crew food + hotels + ...)
3) your pain threshold and (number of sectors, block hours without water/food etc)
4) how much vaseline you think is enough as compensation (having fruitcakes like you and LHC looking out for the T&C's)

But I'm wondering, just how "secure" is a job in a company where you might get fired if you join a union? :O

Very insecure I presume, unless you are well versed in the art of brown-nosing your masters!

I find this so amusingly typical though: somebody comes up with a couple of facts for the benefit of others that are possibly new to this industry and shortly after finds himself attacked by MOL's/leo's dog (metaforically speaking of course)!
Not that I mind at all, and it becomes so transparent who the master is and who's on the leash!

I must confess that a few years back I had applied to join ruinair, not having realised the facts about this company.
Of that I am not proud but we all make mistakes, such is life.

I was rather experienced and type rated in the type of airplanes they operated.
They kindly replied that in order to apply for this job a small fee was required!
This was indeed an invaluable hint of what lay ahead and I steered clear by politely not replying to mol's request for pocket money.

Never regretted it by the way!

end of short happy story.

If you are a pilot working under a BRK contract, you are not a Ryanair employee. Technically you are a contractor with NO job security at all.

The petulant screaming of TRSS and LHC are diversionary tactics to cover the real scandal that is about to destroy the terms and conditions of all pilots in Europe - unless pilots themselves wake up to the danger posed by these idiotic BRK contracts!

It's not hard to find airlines which have made people redundant during the current ecomonic hiccup. Unions cannot prevent redundancies, but absence of union recognition does not necessarily create an advantage which will always guarantee commercial success.

That fact that such a large number of the airlines mentioned have BALPA recognition says more about the vast majority of professional pilots feeling that the union has something to offer them, and that BALPA recognition and membership is important, than it does about any of the redundancies being caused by BALPA (which is what your perverse use of examples attempts to show). Logic doesn't seem to feature heavilty in your arguments, does it Slim?

It's a little rich for the compnay which invented the concept of 'screw-the-pilot' (sim fees, pay for your TR, pay to fly, BRK etc.) so then lay blame the uptake of similar concepts elsewhere at the door of the BALPA!

I have just realized that I could help a bit the very bad financial situation of my own country (ITALY) so I gave a call today to the "Agenzia delle Entrate" (the equivalent of HRMC) and described them what a friend of mine told me about BRK contract (the guy has left no:ok:).

They told me that they are already on the case and they will soon pay a visit in a couple of very small airports in Italy making sure that the individuals involved are actually contributing to reduce our tremendous deficit and that somebody is actually paying national insurance for those pilots.

Speevy


P.S. if you want to give them some more infos yourself 848.800.444 (in Italy)

Gary, I have not claimed that BALPA caused redundancies: what I have claimed is that BALPA have done nothing to stop the redundancies.

Equally, the vitriol conveniently ignores the role of BALPA in the CTC scandal at easy and the Regional "infringement" at LHR: one thing which is abundantly clear, however, is that whenever the union tub thumpers run out of argument they ALWAYS resort to abuse and complaining that Brookfield / Ryanair or anyone and everyone other than, they, themselves and their union, are responsible for the reduction in Ts and Cs.

It would be interesting to see how many of the union acolytes would hand over a substantial proportion of their enormous Brookfield / Ryanair beating salaries to help out the folks being made redundant from the other union recognised companies.

Do that and you could save their souls by freeing them from having to take the FR Euro!

Why do I think that won't happen ?

G-AWZK,
I think right now the smart arses operating through brookfield will soon feel the heat.
Pretending to run a salary system nett of tax does'nt work in the long run especially when the recipients are the exposed parties.
TRSS
You ought to remember mol once was merely a corner shopkeeper in Crumlin proud of ripping off the public.
LEOPARDS DONT CHANGE THEIR SPOTS AND ARE PRONE TO EAT THEIR YOUNG

LEO
men in white coats I think? You quite obviously aren't who you pretend to be

Good grief 45989, what is this ?

Encouragement for those who pay for their TRs ?

Leopards and spots? Tut Tut :ok::ok:

Slim

The very fact that these cadets did not / do not have BALPA representation at easyJet, due mainly to being contracted to CTC rather than easyJet, means they do not come under the protection of BALPA-negotiated agreements and as such are open to the exploitation you mention.

Surely this means there is all the more reason to have union representation, so they can be treated the same as the rest of the workforce?! If they did, then they might have fared better. I know. I was there last year.

You have posts advocating Ryanair's approach to industrial relations (i.e. involving Brookfield contracts), and in the same thread you attack BALPA's 'allowing' easyJet's 'exploitation' of CTC cadets, many of whom are now working on FlexiCrew terms, which is turning out to be more or less a mirror of... er, Brookfield. And you accuse others of myopia...!

TRSS

Far from it. Simply not wishing further misery on someone deluded to think they can buy a job for slave wages aka your sorry outfit!

Re the leopard I suggest you check it out before ending up in the merde!

But Zippy that very union allowed the exploitation in the first place as the negotiations woukd have taken place under the collective bargaining agreement.

Equally, what was the union doing allowing flexicrew to take the jobs of existing FOs? And if they didn't allow them to take existing jobs, why did they allow such a contract variation providing no "protection" whilst allegedly retaining benefits for existing FOs?

I seem to recall that was discussed earlier on in this thread. Since the Flexicrew pilots were not employed by easyJet then BALPA apparently had limited leverage in what they could do over the matter.

Whether that is a 'convenient' excuse or a 'genuine' one, remains to be seen.