As Bruce Wayne rightly pointed out - no one is making the 67 odd million passengers fly with Ryanair. They have so much other choice if they so desire. One thing about our species - we love to hate. Nothing makes us feel better about ourselves than a good whine about issues we know nothing about. this can be regularly advertised on pprune.

Regarding the atrocious scenes at STN, i agree it was a terrible situation. However I was lead to believe that RYR had no groundstaff - swissport look after all things blue+yellow at STN so surely they were the ones not to open the bag drop-off points?? Unless at STN they have their own ryanair bag drop off points, run by ryanair employees - i fail to see how this is indeed ryanairs fault?

Also yes I believe it depends on the base as to your flying hours per year.

Depends on what Ryanair has paid for in the contract? Did they amend their requirements?

Surely overall responsibility for delivering a product to the customer is the owner of that product. If they farm it out to an agency they can not relinquish final responsibility. Consider all the contract pilots who fly for RYR. It is RYR who control directly the quality of how those pilots operate and the number the agency provides. Same here. It is RYR's responsibility to ensure that its agents have the tools to do the job. Howvere, if RYR only pay them enough to open too few desks they have not been given the resources to do the job. Swissport can only provide the resources they have been paid for. Hence RYR's campaign to eliminate check-in desls and hold baggage; cost saving.
Question still remains; you turn up at the instructed time; are not able to check-in due lack of staff; miss your flight; who do you claim against and what is your compensation. Seems like it would be no different, at least, to being bumped off due over-booking.

RAT5

What a load of twaddle.

If ATC give a diversion, or a hold to an aircraft do you hold the operator responsible if that diversion or hold leads to a discrepancy in schedule times, which can and often do cause effect further across the schedules?

Is it then by your assertion, a failure of the operator by it's lack of control over NATS to deliver its product, in that the operator has failed in its responsibility to ensure that it's 'agent' doesn't have the tools to do its job.

Or that an operator that operates out 'x' or 'y' airport has failed by it's lack of control to deliver its product because the airport operator doesn't have the appropriate security staff, scanning equipment, facilities that cause a huge backlog through security processing that causes passenger to miss flights or aircraft to be delayed off block.

Or that an operator cannot process its passengers within a given period due to the lack of available desks, which the airline rents from the airport operator if/when available.

Or that an operator fails to have its aircraft off blocks due to the fuelling facility having an issue with their equipment that prevents the aircraft being fuelled within the time of the turn around.

It does not take too much imagination, or knowledge of how Ryanair "negotiate" contracts with suppliers and airports, to be aware that there is probably little if any provision for "fat" (for the times when there are a surfeit of customers vs agents) allowed for in the amount paid by Ryanair to contracting agencies. Like everything in life, you get (hopefully) what you pay for (and probably not an ounce more)
A bit like trying to call crewing at awful o'clock to report the non-appearance of a colleague for his report , and being faced with an engaged phone for 20 mins. Or having to wait your turn to get a serviceable computer, as no-one seems to have put an IT contract in place to keep them serviceable.
If you cut things to the bone this is the sort of stuff that will happen.

Captplaystation,

I have to agree with you on that point.

If I may borrow an analogy, passengers view airlines as 'utilities' they want the best/most legroom, the best in flight catering, the best IFE, but want to pay practically nothing for it.

They will and do search for the lowest price between point 'a' and 'b' and beyond, that is their prerogative, it's their money and they are entitled to spend it how they wish. If they want to fly a legacy carrier, FR or charter a Global Express to travel between point A and B that is their call.

Conversely, a large sector of the travelling public don't give a stuff and will pay the lowest price available.

This is where low cost carriers fit into the market place.

The fat is trimmed away, completely. There is little room for manoeuvre within contractual terms, thats why the costs are low.

You simply cannot have it both ways. If you want full fare scheduled carrier service on lift between two points and beyond then there is a cost that comes with it. If you want to pay the lowest fare available between between two points, then it comes with the fat trimmed out.

It's cutting to the bone that enables low cost carriers to operate within their market place, if you want the fat, then it has to be paid for.

Bruce, to some extent your right, but every customer has the right to expect a minimum level of service regardless of what they have paid.

Afler all, we`re not talking canapes and champagne here but the reasonable expectation of being able to check in for the flight you have paid for and arrived at the allocated time for.

Unfortunately it is this attitude to basic rights and expectations towards passengers / employees / service providers, that seems to set Ryanair management on a level of its own.

I don't think we are talking about the fat here but about basic services and passenger rights in a civilized continent.
But the race for the cheapest option is re-defining our concept of civilization and there you are with self sponsored and underpaid eastern european cabin attendants, self employed Russians & Brasilians, pay to fly cadets and so on.

Some say the likes of FR are driving the market out of recession, me thinks they are totally changing it instead.....the cheap way.

Flyingstig,


to a degree, yep, however, the minimum level of service provided to a customer is directly proportional to the level of price they are willing to pay.

I am not party to the contractual terms that FR have with the ground service providers, it is not my concern, nor my business. However, having put into place several operations in the past, it has proved frustrating in negotiating the terms and price effectiveness of desks, even if they are made available.

It would be surprising to many people the cost implications of desks at PoE's more so the amount of traffic that PoE sees.

Again, this has to be paid for somewhere. The likes of Dannyangina expect to see increased T&C's in an economy that is close to being worse than anything since the wright brothers got airborne at kitty hawk, yet expect a high level of customer service, from a situation where the services provided are provided by dictum from the airport owners.

In short, the more flexibility you want the more it is going to have to be paid for.

As much FR can be 'blamed' for low service levels in the industry, or lower T&C's for staff across the board, it is the way the LoCo business is run.

Passengers want low prices, the costs have to be cut to provide that low cost, the government is not going to subsidise low cost carriers, they are not the utilities they are viewed as.

Dannyangina wants a pension, his uniform, his health care, his rent, his loss of license insurance, his shoes, his sustenance paid for, he's not going to get that in a LoCo environment. Right now he's not going to get that in a legacy carrier either.

Aircraft operation as we all know is a complex and involved processed, which involves the implementation of other services which cannot be provided by the operator, they have to be provided by third parties and that costs. Those third parties are, like air carriers in business for one thing only.. to turn a profit. So if you want a higher level of service they expect it to be paid for. And there will be times when what is coverable in the costs, will have a fall off.

And so it turns back to the point of:

" If you want full fare scheduled carrier service on lift between two points and beyond then there is a cost that comes with it. If you want to pay the lowest fare available between between two points, then it comes with the fat trimmed out.

It's cutting to the bone that enables low cost carriers to operate within their market place, if you want the fat, then it has to be paid for. "

Dannyangina, you keep professing that FR is the root of evil in the aviation industry, yet you wont leave to seek a flight deck position that will be everything you have ever dreamt of.

Low Cost Carriers fulfil a market segment that the customer demands, hence FR's continued growth.

Did MOL knock you over the head in Le Jazz or Sabor Di Vino and you woke up manacled to Ryanair 737 flight deck?

No ! you applied yourself, you went through the process yourself. you were well aware that FR is a LoCo carrier and that involves an operator that *has* to keep costs to a minimum to maintain its viability in its market segment.

Again, "it's a commercial environment. that is, customers have the choice to fly FR, they are not forced by any government dictum, nor is MOL standing over anyone, whip in hand, as they surf the internet looking for lift between x and y.

They are free to choose FR, EZ, BA, KLM, Air France, Big Bertha's Air Taxi and Flying school, whoever. "

To be honest Dannyangina, your consistent wailing is becoming like a stuck record, and it's getting boring.

If you are so disheartened in FR... LEAVE. Flyingstig, for one will be glad to take your position, as will many, many others.

Just don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.

Dannyangina,

as a side point are you kidding ?

There are contract terms based on the contract of carriage, and they are not a national secret.

A bit of a moot point, what the actual terms and conditions might be (or interpreted to be by a court of law, as Ryanair usually prefer this course of action in the case of a dispute )
All it says in the website is - At airports with self service kiosks (STN ? ) you must have "deposited" your checked in luggage at a bag drop desk no later than 40 min before STD.-
In their place I may have been tempted to have barged to the front, thrown my bag over the counter with the booking paper attached and stomped off to pass the usual pleasanteries with the morons in security . . . but then that is just me. Methinks you "deposited" it, and you can argue the toss later about having it brought to you on a later flight, better perhaps to arrive and buy a shirt & a pair of skimpies ( Mnnn :rolleyes: ) for the Missus than to be hit with ,and have to argue the toss over if you want to depart, a "missed flight fee" of whatever it is nowadays.
A bit cheap & nasty, but then, is anyone really surprised ? :hmm:

Bruce (or shall i call you commandb,Leo & Co.?),

you often play the player and not the ball, why do you refer to ME as if I was the problem, try to concentrate on the facts and not on me.

If you like to have a company where employees don't complain then I suggest you put it in the next T&C's revision under some kind of "mandatory high morale, no complaints and leave if you don't like it" paragraph together with further pay cuts due to "the way the market is".

You are also pretty boring in your one sided view of the issue and strenuous defence at any cost of even the most obviously primitive behaviors of the company and I could also advise you to leave the discussion if you don't like what others say, I don't think you have a doctor's prescription that forces you to read and post here....

But someone obviously more intelligent and forward looking than you once said something along these lines: "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
So feel free to keep posting all the nonsense they tell you to write, se we can all read and draw conclusions.

Fiat Lux (tr. let there be light)
 

It was François-Marie Arouet, better known by his nom de plume, Voltaire.

As much as I can only wonder at the confusion attendant upon coming into the world half English and half French, Monsieur Arouet famously distrusted democracy, which he saw as propagating the idiocy of the masses, something you're rather good at yourself, dannyalliga.

Voltaire's intended last words have something in them for us all.
Happily, he went on to live another three months, though, and when asked on his deathbed by a priest to renounce the devil and turn to God, he is alleged to have replied, "Now is no time to be making new enemies", a witticism later wrongly attributed to Oscar Wilde.

Oscar's last words were rather more prosaic.
I wait in wonder at what your final words might be, dannyalliga?

How about you let this poor old thread die in peace, or is it that you're so involved in seeing it drag on and on, devoid of new thinking, that you just can't let go...another thing evident in your endlessly disappointing expressions of third-rate sentiment.

Aren't you one of the biggest contributors to the discussion?
Why don't you set the good example and disappear?

What a good idea.

Good bye.

Thank you guys!

My first healthy chortle of the day!!!!!! :ok:

You can call me Susan if makes you happy.

What on earth does that mean ?

I have never referred to you as being *the problem*.

As for concentrating on facts, yet again you miss the point by a country mile. You simply cannot grasp market segments. Can you not understand not everything in this world exists to suit *you*.

I have no say in what goes into the T&C's revision, I have a choice in accepting the terms of a contract or not.

You really do fail to understand current economic circumstances.

Not only are people getting pay cuts, not just in the aviation industry, people are getting made redundant in every industry. Airlines are facing huge economic problems that threaten their existence.

Airlines are laying pilots off, not out of choice, just to spite *you* or drive down *your T&C's, but to bloody exist.

Frankly, no matter how many times the economic situation is presented or in how many different ways, you simply cannot grasp that and demand more pay and better T&C's.

If you simply cannot interpret and implement basic information then your competency as flight crew must therefore be questioned.

If you care to review past posts, you will note that a one sided view is NOT what is being presented, it's called a balanced view. That involves taking into account external driving factors and arriving with a balanced view subject to influencing factors..

There is no strenuous defence at all. It is what lucid people refer to as 'reality'.

You expect a low cost carrier to provide all the benefits of a legacy carrier, when under the current economic situation, the legacy carriers are having to reduce flight crews and cut costs wherever they can; Yet, you demand more pay and better T&C's..

NO ONE forced you into your position, nor is anyone forcing you stay.

I have not advised you leave the discussion, quite the opposite. I take a rather perverse pleasure in your posts.. it's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

What I have suggested to you that if you do not like the T&C's that you have, and your demands for increase are not being met, and again let me reiterate this point for you, are not likely to be in the current economic status, then you are free to depart and seek pastures new.

Frankly what you fail to understand, and it looks like i will have to spell this out for you too, is that it is the militant stance demanding better T&C's and pay increase during the biggest economic blight in the history of commercial aviation is what damages T&C's the most as all you do is get management's back up, present the understanding that you have no clue how an air carrier economics work, dont want to know, donant want to understand, just stamp your feet and demand creates a rift between management and crews.

you are the one that has an "Us and Them" attitude to management, yet fail to comprehend that you are on the same team, when the airline does well and managemnet and crews interface with each other and understand each other T&C's increase.

I wont wait for the 'pop' sound of your head coming out of your ass, I'm sure it will remain firmly in place.

hahah ! classic.


The signs of paranoia eh Danny ?

*they* ?

It's all a big 'spiracy is it ?

Yes we are all drawing our own conclusions duckie !

Glad to be of service..

Where do I send the invoice ?

The problem goes far deeper than economics.

The pilot workforce throughout the industry seems to becoming more and more fractious, and is degenerating into a non-unionised rabble, who is content to work piecemeal and who's only aspiration is a fast buck at the end of the month. Witness the bickering about how many block hours such and such is likely to do. This conversation amongst seasoned professionals would be unthinkable 20 years ago, except amongst the oddest of specimen, the aspiring management pilot.

Previous aspirations such as professional self-respect, status within the wider population and benefits that are less tangible on a day to day basis, such as income protection in case of sickness or retirement benefits appear to be setting in the sun. Many of the new breed simply don't seem to place value on these things. You will rue the day, mark my words.

I'm sure carriers such as FR have provided opportunities to many, either through a RHS in a shiny jet or rapid advancement into the LHS. There is a downside to all this. We have been collectively debased and those who have got somewhere far quicker in their career than was previously possible will start see what you've sowed in a few years time, when they realise they're on the verge of burn out and have another 20 years to go before they can draw their meagre pension.

This industry has and always will be about making money. FR have proved themselves very adept at this. But they aren't the only ones making money. Speaking about my company, which is a middling size operator in the UK and part of a far larger group, we make solid profits and provide some very strong benefits to our pilot workforce. Incidentally we are heavily unionised and the management simply wouldn't dare to stoop to the intimidatory methods which FR's evidently does - this is because if you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us and collectively we won't be bowed.

Pilot pay and benefits are only a relatively modest part of the costs of running an airline and once you realise this, if you value your worth fully and get yourselves organised, you too can start respecting yourself again.

But witnessing the singular lack of gumption on this forum, I don't hold out too much hope. Since historical quotations seem to be en vogue, in the words of the Sun newspaper circa 1992, will the last one out turn out the lights.

Over to the Nazi and his Quisling cohorts...

Barden,
As nice a summary as I have seen of the situation the sorry wobegones that pass for pilots nowadays have collectively (the only damn thing they seem to be able to do collectively ) brought upon themselves. :ugh:
Unfortunately, so many of the great unwashed can't see the wood for the trees, so it ain't going to improve any time soon. :{

Barden, I think you make a good point.

At the risk of upsetting some, may I suggest that rapid ascent within the profession may be a contributory factor?

I cant tell you the number of times I have suggested to F/Os, in the rush to get their 3000 hours and thence, as if by devine right, their command. "Would you rather be a quick captain or a good captain" ? Time spent growing in this job is never wasted!

People now get their commands with a few thousand hours and at an age unthinkable a few years ago. I am not disparaging the many very bright and talented pilots around today. In fact, I like to draw a small amount of pleasure from the input I have made to help get them there. However, "what next"? Training Captain? Management?

By the age of 30 some of these guys and gals have got "there", and have run out of steam. There is nothing left to strive for other than more pay for less work/ better T&Cs / less distance to walk between crewroom and a/c / better car park etc etc etc!!

Hence the postings here?! :ok:

Flyingstig, how true!

Have you ever reached a goal and then thought "Now what?"

Success without fulfillment is failure. Dreams and goals are important but I believe it's who and what you become on the way to them that is more significant. Enjoy the journey!

The "if you don't like it, bugger off" school of thought may have a place when talking about niche operators, however with FR it simply doesn't apply for the vast bulk of the pilot workforce.

Most pilots who start their career with FR will end it with FR due to the scale of it's operation. Put quite simply, there won't be enough available seats for the number of bums (in the physical sense only) who are and will be attracted to the industry.

It appears many haven't grasped this.

Any considerations towards Ez implimentation of flexicrew ?

http://www.pprune.org/5123928-post613.html

FR contract looks attractive compared to other options in the industry right now..

a fair comment from an EZ pilot laid off...

http://www.pprune.org/5126220-post641.html

and that is carrier with BALPA representation !

Bruce Wayne, or Susan if you prefer - I follwed your first link and gleaned this

And who is your contract with?

I think what previous posters are alluding to is that this whole degradation of T&Cs for pilots has gone too far. No matter who started it (probably a Yank) it was taken up wholeheartedly by RYR and is now spreading like wildfire. With the exception of legacy carriers, and I don't rule them out, it will spread to every airline and you who have opposed BALPA recognition will have to shoulder a great deal of the blame. It appears to me that the only self respect being enjoyed by younger guys stems from presently being employed and having a reasonable bank balance. This should not be confused with self esteem.

Your second link takes us to the problem faced by CTC guys, see above. BALPA could have no bearing on this yet all your previous postings seem to have you in the anti BALPA camp. Why? Surely it is better that a collective such as them take this issue on rather than the pilot community seperately each put their heads in the sand and hope that the axe is not going to fall on them or, more proactively, they could each get a brown tongue and hope they will be rewarded for the foul taste.

As I have stated many times, I am not a pilot, but I used to hold the profession in high regard. No longer in the case of the individualists such as you, TRSS, LHC (management surely), etc. I hold lesser and more vilified professions such as social workers or baillifs in higher regard.

To Barden & co, I take my hat off. And yes, I do wear one.

(LHC) Leo Hairy Camel = Michael O´leary???????
Ryanair Head Honcho........

Cymmon, Don't give LHC too much credit, LHC aint even head of LHC, someone is pulling his strings. Similar to Andy Pandy or Flowerpotmen but more sinister in respect of aviation.

al446

But out !!!!
You don't have the intelligence to run a decent argument, and the general feeling is that you should go back to your flight sim world, and leave the professionals to their discussions.

Ryanair voted against recognition by a large majority, and the Unionists are even now licking their wounds.
Reason in the current climate prevailed.
Some of the pilots told me that your posts and refusal to apologise did more harm to the union cause than you could imagine.
Mrs will not be pleased.
:=

Day dream - Thank you for your intelligently thought out and erudite reply. Strangely enough as I am looking through the threads here regarding unions there seems to be a tide turning against you. In similar manner, it appears that you are the only one with a bee in your flight cap about an apology, even going to the length of sending me an email. You will notice that I immediately jumped up and took notice.

Would yo care to enlighten me as to how many voted you as spokesperson for the feelings of the majority as in "general feeling"? So far the incoming posts to me have been supportive albeit that the senders do not want publicity, understandably so given the stance some of your ilk have demonstrated. So I will not but out (I think it should be 'butt out')

FYI, there was no vote, BALPA suspended its campaign to RYR management so there are no wounds to be licked. You would also excuse me if I treated your comments about the union cause with some suspicion, I doubt those committed to it would even speak to you if they know your identity. You are a RYR pilot aren't you and not another flight simmer?

Toodle pip


PS Mrs 446 doing well and household harmonious.

Day_Dreamer
 

Sorry Peter, I hadn't seen your 2nd email in which you say 'Its a pity you are so low on the brain totum pole and cant see beyond your nose' It is actually totem pole.

There are no restrictions on who should post on this thread.


Stick with facts........there was no vote in Ryanair regarding the recon campaign.

al446

your post is quite interesting in that you either hold pilots in disdain, or you hold people that choose to consider varying contributing factors that result in a situation and use factual data to determine the most effective way forward in disdain.

what you seem to value are those that subscribe to your point of view without challenge.

As you have pointed out several times, you are very much a union person, however, you take the assertion of factual data, no matter how blunt it may be, pertaining to a specific issue and respond by asserting that you hold those that do not subscribe to your rigid viewpoint with disdain.

It's that sort of mentality that turns people away from unions and why management and union relationships are so confrontational.

The points i have put across so many times in so many varying methods is quite simple:

let me put it another way:

http://www.wtrg.com/oil_graphs/oilprice1947.gif image stripped click here

Aircraft operating costs are on the rise and have been.

Aside from fuel, there are other significant factors that come into play, i am NOT give to give a dissertation on the economics of aircraft operations, contributing factors and legislative influencing factors, however.

Aside from Fuel, the next largest contributing factor for aircraft operation is maintenance reserves, which covers airframe, engines, APU and does not account for avionics upgrades subject to legislative requirement.

Crew costs are up there in the top 5 of operating costs, however, the air carrier has little ability for adjustment in the single largest factor, Fuel. We wont even consider that issue of amortisation / depreciation, lease rates.. or anything to do with the asset itself.... that is a whole other issue and could fill a book.

Likewise the implications of taxation on the asset, on the corporation, on the industry.. another issue in itself and could fill a book.

From the graph above, you will note the historical adjustment in fuel costs.

While fuel costs have grown significantly, ticket prices in real terms have dropped significantly over the same period, as has been necessary for competitive stability.

Overlay the adjustment in fuel prices with industry peaks and troughs. As prices have gone up, ticket prices come down, industry instability has come to the fore.

The erosion of T&C's in the industry is directly linked to the increase in costs that operators face, not down to one specific operator.

if you want informed debate, then have informed debate, not be derisory to those who do not subscribe to *your* point of view.

So what you are saying is that BALPA suspended it's campaign if the face of success ?

That's not a party i would want representing my best interests.

So..

The presentation was that BALPA entered its campaign after being requested to do so by FR pilots..

... BALPA left the pilots that were requesting their assistance to their own devices and gave them no support ?

hmm.. doesn't sound like a group i would want to be fighting for better T*&C's for me.

How much dignity and respect is there in paying 1% of your income for representation when that representation deserts you when you ask for representation!

Or..

did BALPA listen to the requests for representation and campaign for dignity and respect and decide, in the face of overwhelming victory, to desert the pilots requesting representation !

hmm.. doesn't sound like a group i would want fighting my corner !

Or..

did BALPA enter into a campaign only to find that there wasn't the majority support for representation that they would have hoped for and performed an abrupt volte-face?

Bruce Wayne
 

Hi Bruce, Thanks for your response which was well considered and written without venom. As you may attest from previous exchanges we have had, I am quite happy to join debate in this way and actually prefer it. So to answer you -

I think you take my views out of context. I reserve my disdain for those who dogmatically oppose a reasoned viewpoint and will do so with lies (in the case of this thread it was the disinformation re the law that kicked me off), insults, sarcasm when not warranted, etc. What really annoys me are those whose bottom line is "You were not forced to sign the contract and if you don't like it **** off.", hardly the musings off an intellectual giant, nor indeed a rational person to my mind. I suggest that you review my postings on this thread and you will find that I have always tried to ensure that my contributions have been accurate, measured and respectful, it is only when those of opposite view drag the tone down that I will respond in kind. You may argue that I should not 'bite' but I have been arguing an anti-racist point of view in our pretty racist area for years and I've gotten used to it. It is only when I touch a nerve that they start bleating that they will report me to the mods, an empty threat so far. Perhaps I could give special mention here to Day Dreamer who has tried hassling me first on the thread then by uninvited PMs, so I told him to stop harassing me then he started by email, 2 so far. So to the above list you could add intimidation.

At the risk of labouring the point, I have no problem in meeting the challenge of those who oppose my views but let us be fighting (or arguing) like with like.

Untrue, I reserve my disdain for those whose 'factual data'deliberately distorted or rumour traded as fact, my impression of them as company place men remains. As for my viewpoint's rigidity, I am flexible to the extents of my idealogical framework, as opposed to dogmatic, but when the discussion is 'union or not' there is not a great deal of manouvre.

Unfortunately your link did not work, may be my settings following Firefox upgrade, but no matter, your points are not lost, they have been business truisms since pre biblical times however you do not mention shareholders or management costs inc eg MOL so is not a rounded picture. As an aside, RYR's business model is not set in stone and could be tweaked to find the extra towards staffing costs but that is another discussion. Without collective action there will be no brake on how low MOL will drive staff costs, therefore your wages and, by ripple effect, across the industry. You can see yourself how RYR's practices have spread to others (EZY, BMI Baby) in UK and has gained much ground in EU, it is what unfettered capitalism does. That is not a Marxist POV, I have only read Groucho, it is from observation. I have seen it in other industries and if you guys don't do something soon you may find yourselves being paid less than a lowly civil servant. Any counter to that in the form of 'won't happen' does not stand up to scrutiny.

I trust that you have not found this derisory in any way and, hopefully, informed.

Bruce Wayne - Sorry to be pedantic, nobody is going to be representing you as long as you remain a BRK employee.

al446..

when you say, in a post that was specifically addressed to me:

how can that not be taken as a personal assertion that view me personally in less regard than a social worker or bailiff ?


or

so you are specifically stating that i am a liar and dogmatically opposing a reasoned viewpoint.

On the contrary, i have set forth facts concerning the industry on a wider perspective and provided information for discussion toward the wider picture, not a myopic view of individual scenario.

When there is a wider understanding of the picture then advances can be made.

i have said it several times now, and it seems have to say it yet again.

I am licence holder as well. improvements in flight crew T&C's in the industry benefit me directly as well as any other professional pilot.

and let me re-iterate the specific words i have posted before:

"What I am not for is a union attempting to gain a wider subscriber base, for their own benefits, at the expense of its own subscriber base, with a campaign that is bordering on laughable with the premise of better T&C's for it's members in the biggest industry downturn so far."

you are citing me as dogmatically opposing a reasoned viewpoint, however, i have asserted several times some of the factors that influence T&C's directly.. which have been been met with ulterior motive accusation.

yet you have the audacity to cite me as being dogmatically opposed to reasoned viewpoint !

That is what is referred to as "projecting"

What has been a continual failure here is the lack of perception that you have been in discussion with a pilot who has 'a certain degree' of management experience. someone experienced with an appreciation of both sides of the coin, yet instead of entering into a debate on how to improve the industry, all that can be submitted is accusation and insult and assertion of ulterior motives and of being a sock.

As a representation of improvement of flight crew T&C's this thread has proved so far to be an abject failure.

There was a chance to engage in a structured debate and discussion toward how improvements in the industry could be sought, yet any factual data provided is deemed as lies and met with indignant name calling.

Can you see why there is a confrontational view toward unions?

FR's practices haven't spread to others in the industry. If you choose, there is a thread running on "worst T&C's" people have posted T&C's that make FR's look positively golden. These T&C's cover all 4 corners of the planet.

It is being driven by an industry in great turmoil, facing a significant lack of liquidity. Airlines require a vast amount of forward liquidity to survive., that forward liquidity is little available right now and what there is it comes at a price.

If you think that FR itself itself is so influential within the industry that operators from Kabul to Asia copy a specific model to erode T&C's you are must be considering that FR is some great global conspirator to drive flight crew T&C's down as part of some great mater plan. They are down because of the conditions the industry is facing right now. They will rise, but when the market conditions can support them.

T&C's have gone down as operator costs spiral ever upward and passengers demand ever lower tickets and airlines have little control in a vast amount of factors that dictate their operating costs.

Let me reiterate this point again, operator costs have been on the increase while passengers demand ever lower ticket prices.

All the airlines have to work with is the costs they directly control, it doesn't matter if it's FR, BA, EZ, KLM, AF or Big Bertha Air.

I have edited the post with the non functioning link to include a link to the image (it's also here) if you care to overlay the relative cost of air travel to that chart, you will start draw an idea of the peaks and troughs in the aviation industry and the points at which flight crews have seen a reduction in T&C's.

If you *really* gave a damn, you would not be focusing your attention on FR as a basis of the level of T&C's you would be lobbying the government for a break up of OPEC to allow oil producing countries to sell their products in a competitive market not with production and prices dictated to by a cartel.

By the way, under socialist New Labour there has been a huge increase in the amount of public servants employed at the taxpayers expense. many civil servants are on starting salaries more than a starting first office could ever hope for, with senior civil servants drawing incomes significantly higher than the private sector could sustain.

Bruce Wayne, I have to disagree with your analysis. I am a pilot and therefore will hopefully be given more of a hearing than al446. Your innacurate analysis of the debate over easyJet's temporary contracts dispute does you no favours. I would encourage anyone with a mind to find the truth to read the whole thread and not just a few comments by one or two contributors.

Taken as a whole, the work of BALPA has been magnificent at easyJet - as a consequence we are still doing well in the biggest recession to hit the industry for a generation. The tragedy for Ryanair pilots is that they were influenced by management intimidation and the words of Lord Haw Haw himself, Leo Hairy-Camel. William Joyce (Lord Haw Haw) was a magnificent orator, just like Leo is a magnificent writer. However, Joyce like Leo was utterly wrong and backed the wrong horse very spectacularly. I am often found defending pilots on these boards, but I am forced to hang my head in shame at the Ryanair pilots' choice in this case. You have surrendered your lives to MoL, who will kick you to pieces while laughing all the way to the bank. I will never understand the lack of backbone shown, but I fully understand the consequences of your choices. Alas, in the coming days you will too.

NSF

my analysis of the debate over EZ temp contracts ?

in which alternate reality was that exactly.

and for the record given more than a hearing than al446 ?

I think you will find that al446 and i have actually been having a fair degree of discussion or is that huge ass post just before yours not addressed to al446, nor his post addressed to me ?

I provided the links directly relate to two posts made concerning the matters of that thread, it's up to anyone who chooses to read them to update themselves on the thread in full and draw their own conclusions.

or are you here because Doug the Head right in assertion in this post here

yet AGAIN.. let me reiterate .....

I am licence holder as well. improvements in flight crew T&C's in the industry benefit me directly as well as any other professional pilot.

and let me re-iterate the specific words i have posted before:

"What I am not for is a union attempting to gain a wider subscriber base, for their own benefits, at the expense of its own subscriber base, with a campaign that is bordering on laughable with the premise of better T&C's for it's members in the biggest industry downturn so far."

NSF, Thank you for your contribution, and very well said. I would take up one point of disagreement when you say

He couldn't even get a job on the Beano.