Have to agree with no_sponsor. At the time fuel was forecast to go up to $200 per barrel and EZY made use of a temporary decline to $120 I think it was.

Hindsight is wonderful, esp when you think what a fantastic year it could be with $450mil added to the years results!

no sponsor - regarding the pay for line training, the only battles we can win are those that people will fight for. The pay for line training deal was in retrospect a massive error. I thought initially that this would be a minor deal but I was wrong. The seasonal commands deal is a direct threat to every First Officer at easyJet. Knowing the incentive scheme in operation at easyJet, there are managers who will personally gain substantially for successfully bringing this is in. This will only happen if we let it - I remain totally opposed to it in any form and believe it is an issue to fight over.

Regarding the fuel hedging disaster, I have no sympathy whatsoever for whoever made that decision. These guys are paid staggering sums of money to get this right and instead have cost us around $450million! To say it was a difficult call at the time does not cut it for me. BA did not hedge like that, nor did most of our competitors. In the final analysis, their market predictions were right and ours were wrong. It was clearly possible to get it right, most airlines did and we did not - that is what you sack people for or pay big bonuses if you get it right. We at easyJet seem to have an unusual practice where we pay big bonuses regardless of whether you get it right or wrong - nice work if you can get it. And like I said earlier, why are we discussing seasonality when this catastrophic burden has been laid on our business by incompetent people who could and should have done better. As an aside, George Bush is being piloried for making the 'wrong call' over invading Iraq - ultimately history will judge him on that one issue from his presidency (it is too early for me to say one way or the other if he was wrong or not but that is another story!). The guy in the seat has to be held responsible for making disastrous decisions - for me it is not good enough to say it seemed like a good idea at the time.

There's still another side to the fuel hedging. I wonder what amount of money was saved when they were hedging on the correct side of the price. Perhaps that would need to be assessed before the hangman tightens the noose?

The infamous hedge was made about 3 weeks after the price of oil had peaked.

edit: I should say, may have been made 3 weeks after the price of oil had peaked.

The alternative is that is was made 3-6 weeks prior to the peak.

It was within spitting distance of what turned out to be the top of the market.

further edit: The timing was unfortunate but in fairness, locking in the price albeit at such high levels was necessary at the time. If you imagine an aircraft taking off and finding that the destination kept moving further away it's perhaps similar. I assume they didn't want to take the chance that it moved further than there was fuel on board to reach it.

It still makes me wonder why these people think they can predict, and put a number on what will happen in the year ahead.
I find it hard to predict a few minutes ahead in the commodities market.

If it was possible to predict the future I'm sure these guys wouldn't be betting for the company.

Interesting to see how the figures would compare over time if fuel were bought at market price.

Bad Bad News
 

latest news

First Officer requirements for Summer 2009 – Whilst there is currently no permanent external
recruitment of pilots planned to meet our 2009 requirements we are still seeking low cost ways of
ensuring we have sufficient pilots to meet our summer peak. Our objective is to minimise cost by aligning
future base pilot establishment to winter numbers. Therefore the additional pilots that are required for this
Summer (FO’s) will enter through a modified CTC cadet scheme or through other approved suppliers on a
flexible contract basis.

fu.. FU..:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

ba news
 

Thanks for expexted bad bad news Jphil68.
Can I ask you where you read it?
Thanks.

The above info was taken directly from our Balpa news letter 2 days ago!

The BALPA newletter is also a 'word for word' relay of our 'p-mail' weekly internal newsletter that is sent out to all pilots. It was an agreed statement between the Union and the Company. Of far greater interest to all easyJet pilots were the statements regarding future command opportunities. As things stand it looks likely that all future commands will be offered on a 'Permanent Part Year 75%' deal. That means you work full time for 6 months in the summer and then only 50% for the winter months for 78% pay. All a sign of the times.

Apologies for repeating if already stated but there is a VERY strong rumor that a very large Holiday Airline will be sending Temps to EZ for the forthcoming year.

Duration Unknown - though likely no more that 9 months due parent carriers requirement.
Fleet Unknown - though likely the NG as airline in question has surplus on fleet.

Deal is currently being negotiated or release to parent company pilots within 3weeks.

You misunderstand.

The SFO's that get promoted will be on 78% of the Captains salary - a significant payrise, NOT a cut!

The only other option, sadly, is for them to stay in the RHS on 100% SFO salary whilst contract captains fly alongside them for the sumer period.

78% is not ideal, but better than nowt!

Of course it's a pay cut, from the company's perspective the personel sat in the seat is irrelevant, they are paying less for the left seat to be occupied, how can that be right?

Its even more of a pay cut if they employ contract Captains and leave their own SFO's in the RHS!

so anyway i would like to have more infos if you have just regarding the pool or th jail:{:{:{:{:{:{:{:{

In other words, the SFOs' who are promoted receive a 22% reduction in pay when compared to every other commander in the company.

It's a paycut. And a permanent one. I can see why you may think it is a rise if you are already in the LHS at ezy, but from the RHS, the view is a bit different. :ouch:

bit more - by your flawed logic, that it is a permanent paycut, you are expecting those concerned to stay on 78% when made substantive - errrrrr, no!

I dont like it any more than you but its the best of a bad bunch.

The only other option is to cut your nose off and sit in the RHS with a contractor in the LHS.

That is the option. sad but true.

What I expect is the company imposing this 78% proposal as a permanent new pay scale for all new captains. Yes I am becoming a cynic before my time, but I've learnt from some fairly cynical captains at my base! ;)

I don't want contract captains either, but I am uncertain which is worse for our T&Cs (both seats) from a long term point of view. Creation of a B-scale is Cor Blimey's wet dream.

Anyway, on topic, I have heard from mates in Thomson that they are sending 737 crews to ezy during the summer, as mentioned above. Bad news for the hold pool.

As a F/O sitting somewhere in the Command course waiting list (probably way down the list) I have resigned myself to no opportunities this year. To know that once I move seats I am forced onto a PPY 50%/75% roster at 78% of the salary is bit of a kick in the teeth. Why should I be paid 22% less than someone else doing the same job? Using rough figures I make the current CPT salary about 81k, so that's now going to be around 63.2k. I expect the company will still impose the 90% basic as well making it about 56.9k for the first summer season. This will just divide crews and and kill off what morale there is left. Forget fuel policy and going the extra mile. I certainly won't be doing favours, and that includes going one minute into discression. This is nothing but a huge pay cut, dress it up any way you like it.

POINTY END,

Have you actually read the balpa newsletter? Suggest you have a closer look as it covers some of your raised points.:ok:

Regarding holiday airline crews temping for Easy, i think this is rubbish as once again the companys intentions are stated on our balpa newsletter.

Forgive me if I've missed something, however would it not be possible for pilots to reject both this scheme and contract pilots?

Why wouldn't you want to?

Becuase our wonderful Balpa CC have not given us this option on the ballot paper! Apparently calling the companies bluff is not an option.

Obviously haven't seen your CC newsletter, but the discussions have been confirmed by one of our CC members...doesn't mean it'll happen though...

PJS has gone on record as giving this commitment.

If he then goes against it, it will be a total loss of credibility. I dont think he's the sort of guy that plays those games.

I thought the two options had been put out to ballot - why do postings in this thread seem to have decided on the outcome already?

The ballot paper also doesn't allow you to reject both options does it or have I missed something?

On another EZY thread a posting suggests that thousands of American pilots swap from left to right seats every Sept.

That'd be TUI then.

L Met

The company has now twice and 2 years in a row promised BALPA not to take in any more contract pilots.

And its happening again. Sweet.

Worthless and unacceptable.

Paycuts for all of us and the management goes through with all their bonus.

This is totally rubbish. :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

You guys amaze me sometimes. Would you rather accept what appears to be a poor deal for the pilots yes still have jobs in years to come or would you push for the deal you see as correct in your eyes and all be on the dole queue sooner than you thought? I know which option I would go for......have a word with an ex Excel pilot who is now probably in some far flung country (if he can get another job) trying to earn a crust. Whatever deal for contract pilots comes out (and it might not) it's got to be better than signing on. Alternatively, get a stronger CC!

So how far would you take that argument then. In the West we are obviously massively better off than the vast majority of people on this planet. Does this mean we should all accept working for a bowl of rice. The fact is some companies are going against the wall but others are benefiting from this crisis. Easyjet is among the latter and still making a profit. Management is collecting a massive bonus year on year but we should just hand over the vaseline and be glad that we do not work for Excel, live in Chad or have to walk ten miles a day to collect fresh water? The fact is our concesions go straight into the bonus of our management not to put money on the pilot providence fund.Tell you what, when Easyjet management refuses to collect their multimillion pound bonus I will seriously consider some concessions on our Terms and Conditions. Fair?

Management bonuses and high salaries are an area which some agree with and others hate. For my part I don't actually begrudge them the extortionate wages......why? Because as long as they continue to keep a company in profit and me in a job then that's ok with me.

We just have to accept it's a fact of life that some people at the top of companies get paid a boot full of cash each year..that's life. I'd much rather have that than have some no hoper in charge on a minimum wage salary and the company goes t**s up within a few months. Of course you can quote me the banking sector bosses (i.e. paid millions for cocking up a massive organisation), but then you get bad pennies in all walks of life.

Has anyone of you actually calculated the cost per blockhour or the company?

You'd be surprised that PPY75 is actually more expensive.

yes, one of the vociferous 3 has done a good calculation on the BALPA website.

I don´t begrudge large bonuses when they are due either. What I do begrudge is been asked to give up elements of my contracted benefits so someone else can get a massive bonus.

But what happened to your argument of tighten your belt so you don´t end up unemployed, etc Does that not apply to managers then?

It didnt to the chosen 60!

Bad news for those of you in the hold pool waiting for easyJet employment. Update from the company as per today:

There is now no planned permanent recruitment for summer 2009 and the FOs needed will come from CTC flexi programme.

Recruitment for the hold pool has ceased as well.

Sorry.

Elephant and Castle - magnificent posts! I totally agree.

Like it or loathe it, managers tend not to be considered as employees in the same context as us ordinary chaps. They'll do their job and get paid their massive salaries and then either get sacked or move onto another company.

Don't get me wrong I don't like the management pay situation anymore than u do, I just put up with it and accept it as long as they are doing a good job. I don't work for your company so I really can't comment and what might be imposed on you all.

But of E & C I do agree with you and can empathise with your situation

unsubstantiated rumour alert!
 

I have heard that some of the M/A 60 odd that were made redundant, actually received their redundancy package and were then awarded / promoted to a new position. In other words like the pilot sacrifices, the Co. are not being wholly truthful with the numbers. It's spin, yes people were made redundant, however it would appear that the role was deleted. In accordance with UK employment law however, they were offered a similar opportunity. Thus the net change is not 60 odd. These management traits are demonstrated by what E+C highlights. A manager/s will get a bonus based on "Cost savings achieved in pilot group". Not saying measures are not required, but we need to be mindful of how pilot T+C's changes feather the nest for the management.

FPC

Bit of frustration now, why the hell are/were Ezy running recruitment sessions for TRSS at least up until late last year when there is no need for those guys! I dont mean this to read like I doubt what ReallyAnnoyed has said, far from it, I'm sure that's the truth of the matter.

Just frustrated. I guess its them hedging their bets I suppose.

At a training meeting some weeks ago there was talk of 170 F/O's for summer 09, and that may of doubled if the pairings/roster optimizer didn't work.

Seems an awfully efficient system if it saves that many pilots from being recruited. Lets hope they are not over ambitious with the systems capabilities.

So yes, I think they were hedging their bets.

Hope you re right ktt:ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok:i m so anxious regarding the pool:sad::sad::sad::sad: