|
Thanks for all of your responses so far and lets keep this going!
Lets go back to basics and the reason for having a union in the first place. Flybe's CEO and its management team are motivated by one thing and one thing only. MONEY. They don't care if they are in the aviation industry or a hedge fund or making rubber dog :mad:. They will do what ever they can to make the most money. Unions are there to ensure that employees are not exploited in the managements relentless desire to make more money. Flybe's management have indentified what they believe is the most cost effective method of reducing excess capacity "Close small bases, Get rid of the Jets, Get rid of the people in the small bases and those who fly the jets" Nice and simple, yes? Well yes! In fact there is an unexpected bonus! All of the people who fly the jets are also on the highest salaries. Why? Because Flybe claim to desire loyalty from their staff which is why they encourage loyalty by giving extra money to them for every year they stay with the company and free flights even a free pen after 10 years! Oh yes and they also have promised to reward that loyalty by showing loyalty back to those loyal employees by operating a LIFO system where those that have chosen to forgo higher salaries better t&c's etc are promised that most important perk JOB SECURITY! Number one on the seniority list knows that everyone else has to be made redundant before he is! It really is that simple. Its all in black and white. I'm no lawyer but I know there is such a thing as a verbal contract! Well flybe's policies are all published! If that does not give Balpa the mandate to take Flybe to court then I don't know what does! So Balpa may loose, I accept that. But if Balpa one of the richest unions around don't fight this in court then I and every other Balpa member will know that they are not fit for purpose! I am not asking people to with hold subscriptions but I am asking them to make their voices heard and tell Balpa what they think should be done! To my colleagues in Flybe who are not currently effected I urge you to ask yourself one question. When you are old and unlikely to be re-employed, when you have a family to support do you think you will desire your employer to honour its published policies? If the answer is yes you need to support Balpa in fighting this, even if it costs you your present job! Short term, selfish behaviour is why the career choice of pilot has already become second rate. Lets change it! |
Trossie,
Other countries have it "far better" when these things happen. . . .if I could mention France & Scandinavia to begin with, but I am sure there are many others. UK was Donald Ducked after Maggie for this type of scenario. . . . . . |
I remember pilots in MAN and NCL asking the same questions of their colleagues back in January this year when these two bases (and GCI?) we're put at risk by the last useless management.
I remember BALPA fighting damn hard to keep Policy F the official route for this kind of reduction in operation. I also remember far too many 'colleagues' in other bases wishing people in affected bases good luck for 'their' situation. I cannot forget far too many colleagues voting AGAINST the BALPA vote to use Policy F because doing that would cost others their job. Itch, when you've got an airline where some (relatively well paid / comfortable) flight crew treat this job as their 'career' for life, having built up many years of seniority and with it, pay increments / seniority in base etc VERSUS the brand new, fresh FO's who want to rack up hours and move on to the next thing (and even those like me, who would like to make a career here but know that there isn't a defined career path) then you're going to have a massive imbalance of people fighting for the same cause - because they simply don't want the same thing. The company will do whatever they want and BALPA to a large degree are powerless to prevent it. Next year, when flight deck have been made redundant, if BALPA feel there is a case, then they may try take Flybe to the cleaners, and they'll probably get a settlement. But that's next year, and right now Flybe want to cut costs now and they'll worry about employment tribunals later. |
So BALPA are going to get 175 jet pilots pilots saying take them to court.
Then they are going to get the same again if not more saying take them to court I have been unfairly dismissed. If they don't do anything that's them not going to get any low seniority pilots joining. BALPA is stuffed either way. Also if they do take it to court and loose there is a precedent set, that's it for everyone. And they have far larger membership base in other airlines which could be affected. It would basically make it possible for BA to torch one of the old long haul fleets and get shot of a lot of its old timers on the old wage scales. I am not saying they would do it mind. They are going to be getting pressure from all sides and I can't see them having any chance of coming out clean. And those 175 are a conservative 15 million pounds of wage bill a year unless I have got my number of zero's screwed up even if its 1.5 its still significant. That pays for a whole heap of lawyers. I hope the crew rooms at the mixed fleet bases aren't to hostile. How many days are left for the consultation period? I presume some of the routes won't finish until LGW closes as a destination using the jet. |
Itch, of course they're in it for money, why else are they in business? If anyone thinks the management gives a toss about you or I then you are very much mistaken. To quote a famous film with Arnie in it, we are expendable assets, nothing more and nothing less.
It doesn't matter what Flybe's policies are, it's irrelevant. If they don't conform to employment law then they are not worth the paper they are written on. Boeing7117, what did you expect people to do? Vote themselves out of a job? You're deluded if you think people would do this, and you wouldn't have done this either would you. If you're based in MAN right now and you are effectively safe are you prepared to put something to a vote that means your job is untenable? Get real. It's human nature to protect your own back yard, you would be no different. Don't forget that everyone took a financial hit to save jobs, probably including yours. I'm at risk at the moment, I'm not whinging about it, if my number's up then my number's up, I'm not going to moan that others are safe and I'm not, I'm not expecting others to vote themselves out of a job to save me, I'm not expecting others to take a pay cut to save my job either, why should they? I'll take it on the chin and walk away. |
Quantify
have it "far better" Is this the Scandinavia where British airlines (Flybe and BMIR) are operating routes within Scandinavia (maybe again that it is easier to employ pilots in Britain?). What is better, having 'gold plated' agreements and Ts&Cs but being heaved on the dole or having far from the best Ts&Cs but having a job? Maybe the problem at Flybe is that the structure is giving the 'bean counters' the excuse to select the way that they have: if everyone earned the same there would be no financial reason to 'cull' the top group because they were expensive to retain? Seniority lists are turning out worthless and the next thing to look at is 'pay scales'. Just have a 'flat' pay as most modern airlines have, then there would be no reason for the 'bean counters' to target those at the top. (After all, does a '10 year' pilot fly that much more efficiently than a '2 year' pilot that he deserves to be paid a whole lot more?) People must remember that the sole purpose of any enterprise is to make money. So don't criticise your bosses if that is what they are trying to do: if they are doing it properly they will keep you in a job and if they aren't then, the same as in any other enterprise out there, it might be time to think of leaving before things go wrong. But if you are trapped because of your precious place on that 'seniority list' and if 'seniority lists' elsewhere mean that you'll have to swallow all your experience and expertise and start again at the bottom then you will probably be forced to stay until you present outfit sinks. Remember that you're part of an outfit that is trying to make money to stay afloat and keep you in jobs, good old capitalist style. Socialism may sound very nice but , to quote 'Maggie', "the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples' money". Hopefully others can pick up some of the business that Flybe hasn't managed to run properly and hopefully those others can employ as many of the pilots who are being laid off by Flybe as possible. BALPA's job isn't to try to flog a dead horse, in fact if BALPA have promoted some of the inefficient policies within Flybe that have caused these problems, then they might have played a part in killing that horse. BALPA's job now is to try to ensure that those pilots are able to get jobs related to their experience, etc., elsewhere. Ensuring that other airlines don't have 'seniority list' penalties for those pilots looking for work would be a good start. That's what the real work outside the airlines is like, it is now time for the airline world, and their unions, to catch up with that real world. |
informed debate?
hi, can anyone post the sections of the contract that allows redundancy by base and the section "F" so people know what the facts are? Are turbo prop captains being laid off, if so at which bases? Are any captains being demoted?
I guess everyone knew there were potentially problems with schedule "F" but did anyone ask BAPLA to open the can of worms and negotiate a new agreement based on more age friendly legislation? Has the number of redundancies been reduced as the number of routes being cut has reduced ( 60 mentioned but 40 announced) |
I am not asking people to with hold subscriptions but I am asking them to make their voices heard and tell Balpa what they think should be done! To my colleagues in Flybe who are not currently effected I urge you to ask yourself one question. When you are old and unlikely to be re-employed, when you have a family to support do you think you will desire your employer to honour its published policies? If the answer is yes you need to support Balpa in fighting this, even if it costs you your present job! Just like in January? And your response clarifies my point exactly. And to clarify my position further, I will support any action BALPA sees fit in order to preserve jobs, where jobs are unfairly highlighted for redundancy. Would I take a pay cut? Yes. Absolutely. Would I lose my own job to preserve somebody else's? If it was clear that me keeping my job was absolutely unfair then yes and I would back any vote / mandate to ensure my position is in the mix. Why? Because it's the right thing to do. But we know this situation is entirely different to January. If a BASE is closing then there's nothing we can do to help prevent that. If the base closes, the job in that base is redundant. If the fleet in base is closed then again, as above, there's nothing we can do to prevent that either. Can we follow 'our' plane. No, because somebody somewhere is already in a job somewhere else and can do the work required. The difficulty is when a partial reduction in base occurs. How is that decided - that's the part that could be unfair and that's part of this unpleasant situation that I will vote accordingly and be vocal about as and when it happens. |
http://www.pprune.org/nordic-forum/5...redundant.html
Seems it isn't much different in Scandinavia. you have two separate issues going on. 1. One fleet getting disposed of 2. The other fleet being reduced. To me Number 1 is pretty clear cut. Number 2 is going to be the difficult one and they can't just choose the most expensive pilots to go. |
Boing7117
Why? Because it's the right thing to do. Does the FLYBE contract allow for redundancy by base and fleet, if so where does it say so in the contract which pilots have made their career choices? or only LIFO (schedule "F")? If pilots are to be at risk by taking a fleet or base at a weak station they should know in advance what the rules are and have the opportunity to turn down the posting. Why would a senior F/O at a secure base take the risk of accepting a command at an outstation where the route is vulnerable? If pilots refuse to take postings at "risky" bases or fleets the company would have to rethink its policy |
Well said Artic Monkey :D
Itch - It doesn't matter if Flybe's policy's are verbal or published. If they don't conform to current employment laws they are worthless. Policy F is old, outdated and unfit for purpose, it is not worth the paper it's written on! |
LIFO isn't the issue here. The company matrix uses seniority as the majority factor so in effect LIFO is been used. The issue is how the company applies the matrix, if it chose to apply the matrix to a global pool (i.e. the entire seniority list) then we wouldn't have an issue, the problem is it's choosing to create pools within specific bases, fleets and seats, which flies in the face of what policy f says should be applied. Despite been safe this time around I wasn't in Jan and may well be the next time the company decides to make redundancies which is why everybody should support the application of policy f. It's a rubbish situation and I really hope there's a happy ending however unlikely that appears to be at the moment. :(
|
In response to the suggestion that Flybe pilots should just be transferred to easyJet, that is all very nice in theory but what easyJet want in a pilot may be different to what Flybe wants and some may not be right for the company. Plus you have the guys (myself included) who worked hard at easyJet recruitment this year and were initially welcomed into the company but are now sitting in the hold pool nervously hoping for a start date before they drown. Is it really a fair suggestion that they should be usurped by Flybe pilots who have not even sat an assessment just because their job is at risk?
Don't think I'm not sympathising because I was in the very same position at Flybe earlier this year and know exactly how they feel. But I would not have wanted to jump the queue ahead of someone in the pool, regardless if they had a job. There will be jobs at the places the easyJet 'poolers leave though and if there are still jobs available at easy then perfect. Good luck to everyone at Flybe, the professionalism on view earlier this year and still now when you listen to the R/T is outstanding. |
what easyJet want in a pilot may be different to what Flybe wants |
Saad Hammad (FlyBe CEO) is a very clever man. He knew he had to make some drastic changes to FlyBe in order for it to survive.
First and foremost he needs to get rid of the very people that got FlyBe into this mess in the first place - the upper management....Tick. Next he needs to address airport , handling , A/C lease, and other non staff related operational costs and get a better deal than the previous management.....Tick Next came the staff costs - the most expensive being the pilots - hmm, this one's tricky as they have a union. If he just instigates a cut across both pilot fleets/rank he could increase the strength of BALPA and have a mutiny on his hands. How can he save a large sum of money and keep the rest of the workforce sweet ?http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...s/confused.gif Having taken the time to talk to his staff, he then discovers an answer. The Dash crews are fed up with the fact that they do more sectors than the Jet crews and get paid 10% less for it. As many of the Jet crews are still (although more senior) relatively young, they also feel that their prospects of getting on a Jet is a long way into the future. Hmm, Saad thinks....If I ground most of the Jet fleet, make most of the Jet pilots redundant, that would solve my salary saving problem. I could also put the word out to the Dash crew that the company is in big trouble (even though we made a profit last year) and is close to going bust. That way the Dash crews will be fearful of their jobs and BALPA would have to accept it. I could also give the impression that after these cuts and after the company gets back on its feet we will be expanding - possibly with new routes, new bases and new Jets. Now that we have got rid of most of the Jet guys and with them the Dash pilots barrier for career progression, they could be flying a nice shiny Jet much quicker than they thought. So the Dash guys - although feeling a little guilty for their more senior colleagues, accept that this is best for them. They keep their heads down and allow it to happen, after all if they fight for Policy F they may put themselves at risk as well. The UNION between the pilots is dead.....TICK And now the future. Once the dust has settled, Saad needs to make even more cuts to make even more money...after all his reputation is at stake here ! The pilots that have survived the cuts have proved that seniority is dead, the Union is dead and the contract isn't worth the paper it's written on, therefore lets have no seniority list....TICK Next without seniority and loyalty we don't need a loyalty pay...time to get rid of increments ....that saves a lot http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...ilies/evil.gif TICK Next without a higher jet salary to compare themselves to, the Dash crews are left with comparing themselves to other European operators....but wait Saad thinks, they are the highest paid turboprop pilots in Europe....Hmmmm........ Mowaa ha haaa TICK TICK TICK BOOM |
A 25% cut in Pilots is an aweful lot, how many aircraft are going?
Any Flybe Pilot should be looking to get out. No doubt Flybe will do a deal and keep a few more but end up short of crews. :ugh: |
I don't think anyone has disagreed with the fact that management are financially motivated to find the least cost solution. So the question is
Have Flybe management chosen the correct path. Consider what I shall be seeking compensation for. I will go from a Captains salary of £80,000 to a first officers salary of £50,000 and will be on that for lets say 5 years but it could easily be 10 years if I follow the companies guidance and am lucky enough to get a job with Monarch. That's a loss of earnings of between £150,000 to £300,000 and that's assuming I get a job straight away. When I moved house a couple of years ago it cost about £40,000. Chances are I will have to relocate. Then there is my wife's job, she has a good job but may not be able to do it if I have to relocate. Then there is the stress that we are all being, unfairly, subjected to now. I for one have not had more than 5 hours sleep a night since this started! And last but definitely not least are the court costs. Multiply that lot by 150 and it adds up to............ A LOT Now compare that to the costs involved in following the policy Well to be fair we need to see the retraining and relocation costs from the company but many of us have Dash ratings already and as for published relocation costs, they are no way near what I shall be seeking compensation for! Then lets look at the people who would be made redundant. Most will be First Officers at the beginning of their careers. they will have read the redundancy policy and could not really claim to be surprised that the company followed the policy. They will probably get a better if not similarly paid job else where so little or no lost earnings They are probably in rented accommodation as they like to move around progressing their careers so moving costs are minimal. They will probably get a job more quickly too. I guess most employers looking for First Officers would favour experienced FO's over experienced Captains. They too will suffer the stress, I know that, I lost my FO's position and it sucked! But looking back I was lucky not to have a mortgage, wife and kids and an elderly parent to support! Then there is the question of whether they would want to take the company to court. Its a small industry and when your working your way up do you want the trouble maker label? Some will and some will not. As for me, my blood is boiling as are many of my colleagues. I'm prepared to fight this all the way, even if it costs me my career! To those that say "If company policy doesn't match the law it's not worth the paper it's written on" I disagree. If it were that simple there would not be a legal industry! There are issues over custom and practise, the fact that LIFO was applied in January this year and age discrimination to mention just a few. On age discrimination, bear in mind, new pilots are of all ages thanks to age discrimination legislation, not so for the most senior. So are 150 senior pilot tribunals, through Balpa or privately, really going to be cheaper than following the written policies? I think not! In fact I think the management's present course is taking a hell of a risk with share holders money! |
The only way LIFO would ever work is if everyone earns the same increment. That's what we should be campaigning for, a better basic salary with fewer increments. Otherwise the "bean counters" will always find some way to eliminate LIFO. The harsh reality will always be a year 1 Captain/ FO can do the job of flying passengers from A to B just as effectively as a year 17 Captain/ FO yet the more experienced crew earn far more. In their mind it's like having two machines that produce exactly the same thing, just one costs a lot more than the other.
Can't express how sorry I feel for those Flybe guys at the top of the list facing redundancy, also really hope there is some hope at winning this and putting a bit if job security back out there. If it all fails best of luck finding new jobs, it's not much but at least you have some hours. |
seniortarget,
that is all so horribly machivellian/divisive/twisted that I feel sure you are probably 100% correct. Itch, what you are saying is a "fair", & "common sense" solution, but. . . . how often have you seen/heard airline management (or high-flying businessmen in general ) respecting either of these two principals. |
There is a cap of 87k compensation for unfair dismissal.
And the last company I worked for that did redundancy's employed special lawyers to deal with it which included insurance for any compensation claims resulting from the redundancy. This was none airline though.. Acas - New compensation limits for dismissals set for 2013 |
Itch
What an unbelievably self centred pile of :mad:! Essentially you are saying that FOs lives are already crap so it's not such a big deal to crap on them. If I were a Flybe FO I would be rubbing my hands with glee at the prospect of the Senior captains getting it in the neck if they have attitudes like yours. Senior people are less cost efficient than junior people. They do no more work for more money. No brainer, ditch the senior people. The positive side of this is the death of the seniority system like senior target says. |
Itch,
You are making huge assumptions in your last post! :ugh: It doesn't help your argument. |
I don't think anyone has disagreed with the fact that management are financially motivated to find the least cost solution. So the question is Have Flybe management chosen the correct path. Consider what I shall be seeking compensation for. I will go from a Captains salary of £80,000 to a first officers salary of £50,000 and will be on that for lets say 5 years but it could easily be 10 years if I follow the companies guidance and am lucky enough to get a job with Monarch. That's a loss of earnings of between £150,000 to £300,000 and that's assuming I get a job straight away. When I moved house a couple of years ago it cost about £40,000. Chances are I will have to relocate. Then there is my wife's job, she has a good job but may not be able to do it if I have to relocate. Then there is the stress that we are all being, unfairly, subjected to now. I for one have not had more than 5 hours sleep a night since this started! And last but definitely not least are the court costs. Multiply that lot by 150 and it adds up to............ A LOT Now compare that to the costs involved in following the policy Well to be fair we need to see the retraining and relocation costs from the company but many of us have Dash ratings already and as for published relocation costs, they are no way near what I shall be seeking compensation for! Then lets look at the people who would be made redundant. Most will be First Officers at the beginning of their careers. they will have read the redundancy policy and could not really claim to be surprised that the company followed the policy. They will probably get a better if not similarly paid job else where so little or no lost earnings They are probably in rented accommodation as they like to move around progressing their careers so moving costs are minimal. They will probably get a job more quickly too. I guess most employers looking for First Officers would favour experienced FO's over experienced Captains. They too will suffer the stress, I know that, I lost my FO's position and it sucked! But looking back I was lucky not to have a mortgage, wife and kids and an elderly parent to support! Then there is the question of whether they would want to take the company to court. Its a small industry and when your working your way up do you want the trouble maker label? Some will and some will not. As for me, my blood is boiling as are many of my colleagues. I'm prepared to fight this all the way, even if it costs me my career! To those that say "If company policy doesn't match the law it's not worth the paper it's written on" I disagree. If it were that simple there would not be a legal industry! There are issues over custom and practise, the fact that LIFO was applied in January this year and age discrimination to mention just a few. On age discrimination, bear in mind, new pilots are of all ages thanks to age discrimination legislation, not so for the most senior. So are 150 senior pilot tribunals, through Balpa or privately, really going to be cheaper than following the written policies? I think not! In fact I think the management's present course is taking a hell of a risk with share holders money! Essentially you are saying that FOs lives are already crap so it's not such a big deal to crap on them. Which pretty much ensures what the vote is going to be if BALPA puts it to the members. |
Is BALPA fit for purpose?
The OP asked the question if BALPA was fit for purpose.
BALPA is a labour union bound by the labour laws of the UK. BALPA is almost toothless when it comes to protecting its members because the labour laws of the UK make them toothless. Can BALPA stop Flybe from doing it 'Saad's way' - no they can't, because until an employee has actually been dismissed, the union and employee can't claim unfair dismissal. Does ignoring policy F mean a clean cut compensation claim for the employee - No. Because again the laws of the UK mean that just because its written in black and white doesn't mean it's legally binding. If the company can convince a judge that the policy is unworkable, unrealistic, unfit for purpose, and unfair to the greater workforce, then it could be deemed void. Is policy F unfit for purpose - well Flybe needs drastic changes to survive, a turnaround within the constraints of policy F would bankrupt the company, doing nothing would bankrupt the company, not following policy F gives them a lifeline, a small gamble that if it went to court they wouldn't pay massive legal fees for unfair dismissal, however losing in court...... would bankrupt the company. I honestly think that Flybe management are playing the only card they have left. I have no dog in this fight, I left Flybe many moons ago. Just my 2 cents |
"I honestly think that Flybe management are playing the only card they have left. "
.......and all the other airline bosses are watching. |
There will be quite a few of them laughing there pants off just now after having fights over routes and having to shut down bases themselves in the past because they couldn't afford to run the route at a lose like flybe was to get rid of them.
|
When I read this thread & (some of ) the attitudes therein (never mind the totally "unfit for purpose" industrial legislation) I am so glad I p1ssed off from the UK 21 years ago.
Tourist, you may be cheaper than Itch, but, in the old days we subscribed to "get what you pay for", hence why 17 years seniority may have commanded a premium. Regretably in the i-phone generation, we seem to have lost the notion that experience has any value, & seem to believe that a steely eyed OS-X ace will do just as good a job as an old f@rt in all circumstances. It is surely cheaper to keep all the young guys, but, should no consideration be given to the difficulty one of "advancing years" may have in sourcing alternative employment. The younger you are, assuredly the easier it is. Of course experience should count, but , in this cheapskate world it doesn't. Apart from loans to pay for the "coveted" ATPL/MPL /TR I would wager that older guys have more commitment in terms of families/mortgages etc. . yes you retort, but they have worked for long enough to have had the opportunity to have taken care of them. . . so, I shall settle for my final uttering. . . I think you are behaving like a disrespectful little :mad: to someone that possibly/probably trained/mentored/tested you. Congrats on your sense of levity. |
And may you enjoy FUBAR and keep your nose out of places that you don't like!
|
captplaystation
Don't make assumptions. Not young. Not at Flybe. And most certainly was never mentored by any **** with attitudes of entitlement like him. Salaries should be earned by performance rather than place sitting. p.s. he really does sound like the mentoring type, doesn't he, throwing women and children behind him in the interests of securing his position. |
Just reread your post.
Quite enlightening. You bemoan the fact that experience does not count in this world yet support the seniority system that ossifies that exact system in place. The moment you move airline, through choice or not, all your experience is worthless. You start at the bottom regardless. |
I also suspect itch has never even spoken to a dash fo at work outside a crm course.
And he won`t be the only one on the jet fleet. |
One never mixed with the proles MJ :E
|
'Twas ever thus. Pay offers weighted towards the Q400 fleet which. A fleet which had the bigger vote by virtue of having three times the number of pilots. Guess who won?
Only kidding about the proles, you occasionally had to talk to them if only to suggest they move out of the way. ;) |
The OP asked the question if BALPA was fit for purpose. BALPA is a labour union bound by the labour laws of the UK. BALPA is almost toothless when it comes to protecting its members because the labour laws of the UK make them toothless. Can BALPA stop Flybe from doing it 'Saad's way' - no they can't, because until an employee has actually been dismissed, the union and employee can't claim unfair dismissal. Does ignoring policy F mean a clean cut compensation claim for the employee - No. Because again the laws of the UK mean that just because its written in black and white doesn't mean it's legally binding. If the company can convince a judge that the policy is unworkable, unrealistic, unfit for purpose, and unfair to the greater workforce, then it could be deemed void. Is policy F unfit for purpose - well Flybe needs drastic changes to survive, a turnaround within the constraints of policy F would bankrupt the company, doing nothing would bankrupt the company, not following policy F gives them a lifeline, a small gamble that if it went to court they wouldn't pay massive legal fees for unfair dismissal, however losing in court...... would bankrupt the company. All BALPA members listen to what is being said because it applies to every UK airline pilot. Have a look at your contract and work out which sections you think your compny will honour? Then consider the Flybe situation and if it impacts you. If your answer is, "I'm ok Jack", your head is firmly in the sand. Any BA pilots following this issue? I feel for all those in Flybe at the moment. There but for the Grace of God. BALPA is divided by it's structure, management know that. EASE FTL rulings have impacted on BALPA's perceived influence. Is BALPA fit for purpose? I remain a member for individual grievance coverage. Best fortune to all in Flybe. |
Mud slinging ain't gonna help! Lets get back on point! (sorry mentoring over)
Should a company honour it's policies? Should the employees representatives (Balpa in this case) fight to ensure a company does so. The time to decide whether you like those policies is before you join. I think a meritocracy like Easy Jet has many good points. I think the seniority system has many good things about it. Neither are perfect but we knew what we were joining when we did so. Remember when it was illegal to trade on Sundays but they did it anyway because they made more money than the fine. That's what I believe Flybe are doing. They have figured out that it will probably (providing not too many people take them to court) be cheaper to break the agreements than to follow them. My last post was an attempt to demonstrate one thing. Why Flybe may have miscalculated. The career of pilot is already second rate. How much further are we prepared to let it fall? Every time we let employers treat us like this it's another nail in the coffin. |
Folks.
It's 'Mind over matter'. They don't mind, you don't matter. Working overseas is better paid, much more enjoyable and not living in the UK has a set of advantages all it's own. So glad I've left. ;) From somebody who is more relaxed, better paid, healthier and warmer than he's ever been before. And not paying UK tax either! :ok: |
The company can and WILL do what they see fit. They will of sourced good sound legal advice before going down the route they have taken. That advice will be fact and based on current employment laws which has concluded that policy F is unsafe in its current format!
Regardless of your opinion on policy F, stop clutching at that straw! It is an inherited prehistoric document that is unfit in the current work place! Do you see this practise at other companies like Tesco when they have to make cuts? NO! Because it wrong! Is BALPA unfit for purpose? YES! I left Balpa a long time ago for many reasons that I won't go into on here, but suffice to say I think they are a very expensive waist of space. My colleagues say to me you should be member to protect yourself. If that is the only reason people can give to be a member of a union then that says it all! I will keep my fingers crossed for you itch and everybody else at risk, including myself! However the time has come to take this on the chin and move on with life. Nothing is certain and I feel for people who have their head in the sand thinking policy F will save them. |
Itch, you make alot of assumptions. Did you read the latest balpa press release? They're still exploring if there is litigation to be answered. You may well end up a very, very disappointed little itch. How confident are you of even stepping into a courtroom? I'd be careful hedging your bets on this one.
|
At last, voice of reason set 1013...
A mirror of what I said on page 2, this decision is made...if you have the "at risk" letter, it will happen! Put your efforts into looking after number 1! |
Itch,
You need to call in sick. You are so wound up and short of sleep (your own admission) that no-one, crew or passenger, should have to fly with you. Print out a copy of your post #59 and take it off to your GP and he/she will certainly book you off. (And as this is all after you have been formally notified that you risk losing your job that will not be a period of sickness that will be able to be held against you and still stand up in any tribunal.) Now to all of you Flybe pilots who are complaining about losing your bases/jobs, etc., just think very carefully about all the other pilots out there who lost their bases/jobs because of Flybe undercutting their airlines and making their routes and bases unviable when they had got by quite happily for years before that. It's that undercutting that has made Flybe unviable and causing your problems, but you didn't complain about it at the time. (To make it worse, Flybe now pulling off any of those routes will be adding insult to injury for any of those pilots who lost out to Flybe's predatory but unsustainable past practices.) To those of you who are 'gloating' from afar (having left the UK 21 years ago, etc.), just shut up and carry on playing in your sandpit (but watch out that the cats don't cover you up!); it must be very, very boring there if there is nothing else to do other than put 2,000+ posts on PPRuNe!! Now back to if BALPA is fit for purpose. BALPA is an Association (that is in its name) and it does that very well. As a union? Well, often it could do better, but it's up to the members to get involved and stay involved in order to make that work. And when you do so, stop trying to hark back to old 'civil service' style work practices, the world just doesn't work that way any more; try to get your agreements and practices up to date and realise that the airline is in the business to do... well, business! Airlines are not socialist-style pilots' careers support systems. I bet that most of those complaining bitterly about BALPA have not done anything about being personally involved with the union up to now. There is a saying that generally countries get the government that they deserve (i.e. apathy from the population allows a government to become whatever it becomes) -- the same applies to your union. Did you get involved? If the answer is 'no', then you've got what you deserve. But if you do get involved, be realistic: idiots like McCluskey are living in lala-land! For all of you who are being realistic, good luck for new jobs. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:29. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.