If those figures are correct, MON would have the worst pay and conditions in the UK. I'd tell them to take a jump. Why sign up to that when Id be looking to leave anyway. I despise the way pilots and crew get the blame for management inadequacies.

What happens to those refusing the salary reduction?

In a nutshell - If people refuse, the airline won't get sold, the M's declare insolvency and everyone is out of a job.

That is absolute nonsense.

If a company's going to be insolvent, you'll find out when the administrator turns up. Any business on the verge of administration never mentions it in advance.

To say we need a paycut otherwise we'll go into administration is complete game playing. If the funding was so tight that it depends upon pay reform means there isn't enough cashflow head-room anyway for a company the size of Monarch to survive.

Have the aircraft lease payments taken a similar haircut?

What guarantees do you get it won't go into administration anyway?

What happens if an employee votes no?

Have you seen the due diligence report on their business plan?

Absolute game playing by management.

Your management are not performance-based-bonus-hungry-:mad: as seen in much of the low cost sector, they are trying to save your jobs. The cuts are severe, but for the business' long term survival, Monarch's costs must match (beat?) its' competitors.

Monarch's decade-late acknowledgement that the "UK to The Sun" market is firmly in the hands of the low cost sector is the reason the required adjustment seem so severe.

Rubbish!! look at TUI/TOM decent pay and conditions for crew and pilots, UK to the Sun routes... half a billion pounds in profit last year!! Monarch have been failed by decisions made at board level and the hard working crews are getting screwed for it.

If they are considered expensive then fine, offer a haircut but the figures quoted sounds more like a punishment!!

That's bull. Time and again you see companies turning to the the staff demanding a cull of pay and conditions in order to save a company as if it were the staff that caused the problem. These guys aren't consultants coming in. Theyre management who through their own collective board level failures have led to a certain corporate situation. They took the job and the big bucks, that's their remit. Punishing the workforce only works if it's genuine and across the board. I'd want to see a written guarantee that management are taking an equivalent proportionate cut (getting off lightly as they're in the driving seat which caused this) and also a pledge that should high times return, a reinstatement of conditions takes place and not a case of yesterday's panic turns into today's norm.

AF - do you still believe in Santa Claus? Management couldn't care less about saving jobs.

As an example, EZY is a business with a market cap of £5.5bn and profits before tax of £500m so let's not pretend there's not money to be made.

Management have been cooking this up for a long time, and the threat of insolvency (is that administration?) is just another move in the chess board.

If administration/liquidation is an option, presumably you've demanded to be paid all PILON, redundancy, holiday pay etc above the statutory levels with immediate effect?

You can't really blame the current management as most of them have been there less than 18 months. The blame sits squarely with the last board (and the one before that) who have all left with a big fat cheques in their pockets. The guys who are there now have to face a reality where all the assets have been sold and the bottom of the barrel has been reached.

Tartin. Glad you've finally seen sense. I remember several debates with you centering on the hapless ineptitude of directors past (and some still hanging on) going back probably 5 years or more. The warning signs have been there for years, unfortunately those that could see this coming who posted on the Monarch threads were generally shouted down as naysayers or trolls, or it got lost by posts from people dazzled by generous t&c's quick time to command and a mythical aircraft order.

Just a shame the culprits have all but disappeared with their payoffs.
Good luck everybody.

Not looking good
 

Just read that article. Not looking good for those close to retirement at all!

Pay 30% and forget the £tens of millions in promised DB pension, or I'll blow up your airline.

To any businessman, that sounds like a terrorist.

To some of you, it's met with cries that they need to do this, the new management are good guys and can't be blamed!

You need to start getting streetwise pronto, and get a professional adviser onboard.

Whilst one can understand the comment about 'the family' has invested enough over recent years it completely ignores the return and tax advantages it has enjoyed over many many years, of course there can be no blank cheques for future investment, but pensions provisions should have been fully funded, a hair cut of the magnitude suggested here is disgraceful and ought to be illegal

This will do nothing for customer service despite the much vaunted re training of front line staff, i suspect Monarch will be a re run of bmi with death by a 1000 cuts, the only difference is that its German owners Lufthansa had rather more integrity than this dodgy Italian/Swiss bunch, Lufthansa even topped up the money paid into the PPF post sale to ensure members got all or close to their projected benefits.

To suggest that Monarch can compete with he likes EasyJet/Ryanair/Norwegian or even Jet2 is living in cloud cuckoo land, Monarch will bleed cash this winter and the uncertainty over its future will result in tickets for next summer been sold at distress pricing, if it gets that far

BALPA are negotiating behind a non disclosure agreement, so we have very few facts. They appear convinced by the threats.

Presumably there have been annual reports about the state of the pension fund? Has the deficit been building steadily over 10's of years or has it accelerated rapidly in the last couple? Has the company been making agreed contributions as required?

This is going to get really ugly - and I sympathise with all affected.

BALPA are negotiating behind an NDA and management are using The Times!

Let's not forget that the auditor signed off their accounts in May 2014, which means they have satisfied themselves that the business is a going concern for 12 months. Equally, they did not include any going concern issue in their audit report.

ATOL still renewed as fine.

Negotiation against terrorists is not in line with BALPA's cosy chats. Stealing candy from kids.

I know someone who works for an asset management company whose services Monarch employ and this person revealed to me a few years ago that Monarch had enquired about the legalities surrounding dipping into the pension pot. Rather loud alarm bells. The management at Monarch have a lot to answer for.

I flew with Monarch for 9 years from the late 70s. I have always thought of the airline as being a survivor and I only hope for those working there, that there is a turn around in the airline's fortunes.
Without wishing to be seen as self-centered, does anyone know the position of those of us already drawing the pension?

My understanding from being in the same position as you but with a different company is that once you start to draw your pension you are protected and the pension arrangements cannot be changed without your agreement. If anyone knows different from experience or knowledge I would also be interested.

"You will have been receiving a pension from your scheme before your former employer went bust.

If you were beyond the scheme’s normal retirement age when your employer went bust, the Pension Protection Fund will generally pay 100 per cent level of compensation, which means we will generally pay you the same amount in compensation when your scheme enters the PPF.

Your payments relating to pensionable service from 5 April 1997 will then rise in line with inflation each year, subject to a maximum of 2.5 per cent a year. Payments relating to service before that date will not increase.

This information may also apply if you retired through ill-health or if you are receiving a pension in relation to someone who has died."

There's no getting away from the fact that legislation should be in place to safeguard the individuals' pensions and not for want of a better term allow companies to 'turn the tap off' when the going gets rough.

Yes, FANS is correct about the PPF but it must be appreciated that with 3% inflation it has been calculated that your pension is worth half in twenty years time. The money you've paid in long-term to cover this eventuality simply disappears into the coffers of somewhere, I know not where.

Been there, done it with bmi! There were no warning ever given about the security of our scheme until steps were taken by certain parties to ensure. it's eventual demise.

Good luck to all of you.

The PPF is a massive help compared to the Maxwell days.

That said, inflation is critical to a pension -particularly when the government is trying to inflate its way out of the debt issues.

Ultimately, you have a company that legally promised its workers a consideration, and it is now seeking to walk away from that in whichever manner it can.

That is one reason why I find management's behaviour a disgrace.

Also consider this - the PE houses looking to invest will want to make 5 - 10x their money on such an investment....

Are there currently any MPL holders in the airline with less than 1500 hours? :uhoh:

That is, sadly, not true at all. The compensation (which we are only just receiving now so we have lost out of 2 years of booming stock markets) makes up only part of the loss and unfortunately the more you lost the less, in percentage terms, compensation you receive. Some members who were close to retirement have lost up to 2/3rds of their pensions or more.

Good luck to all you Monarch pensioners who have paid in for years, I feel for you.

There are I understand MPL license holders with less than 1500hrs in MON just as there were in Flybe during their recent crisis when pilots were laid off.

MPL had only been going a couple of years and already there are a couple of participating airlines which have needed to lay off pilots whilst using the scheme. I think it is unacceptable and the CAA should be ashamed of allowing a scheme which indentures new pilots to businesses which no matter how well known or long established are proven to be financially precarious. By which I mean every airline in the UK.

It has been related to me that Carolyn McCall has in conversation alluded that ex-easyJet cadets now discarded by MON may be welcome to return to EZY subject to satisfactory training records. Good luck to all during what must be a massively stressful time.

@jm926 - There certainly are - 2 groups of 6 if I am not mistaken, both from CTC. The last intake of CTC Monarch wings, who have just finished their flight training in New Zealand, have been dropped by the airline and taken on by easyJet from what I've heard. :bored:

MPL
 

Regarding MPL guys. Their main concern is the fact they'll be getting dumped into the market with low hours. The union have given us more specific information regarding the status of their licences.

The rest of us are just crossing our fingers that the company survives and they'll be minimum demotions/redundancies.

Does make me think I should have stayed in my last business. My last company (out of aviation) has grown from 50 employees to 200 and increased turnover by £40m in five years.

Flying planes for a living is comical at times! :hmm:

Well, encouraging to hear rumours of easyJet accepting applications from their former cadets. One of the big risks of MPL, but at least it sounds like those guys mid way through training won't be completely hung out to dry.

I'm sure there are many more Monarch guys with a lot of uncertainty ahead. I work for a competitor but it's nonetheless awful to hear the news about their restructuring.

All the very best to the guys affected....

Good luck all you guys at Monarch. Nothing good ever comes from an airline struggling or folding. Managements elsewhere use it as a reason to screw their own workforce and drive down industry terms and conditions. Here's hoping a good rescue package can be put together :)

JM926 - I would not hold your breath over easyJet accepting former cadets as I am told that is not the case. I think the CEO was asked in a brief conversation on the flight deck about the issue and gave a generally positive reply, which had a caveat of 'subject to a good training record'. That clearly includes a good attitude. A number of those guys left hating easyJet, and were very vocal about it. They felt they were working for a rubbish company and Monarch offered a 'proper' contract and treated their staff so much better. They only good thing easyJet had done for them was teach them to fly an Airbus and they could not wait to leave. Most companies do not like being told by foolish young people with no life experience that they are a bunch of losers - easyJet are no exception. These were young guys from CTC who had been given the opportunity of a lifetime by coming to work for one of Europe's biggest and most stable companies, flying brand new Airbuses all over Europe. Why would easyJet take back people with a proven track record of complaining when there are literally thousands of other pilots desperate to join and who will just be incredibly grateful for the opportunity?

Have to agree with The Count. The more vociferous ones were a pain in the ar$e and it was good to see them go.

Those with a bit more maturity and dignity accepted that, at the time, there was a better offer on the table and left with dignity; I suspect they will be the ones Davina is referring to.

I never understood why some were so disparaging about easy, after all they knew exactly what they were signing up to, nobody held a gun to their head and I'm pretty sure such personal objections weren't voiced at the interview!

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, eh?

These were the cadets that were complaining vociferously about low T&Cs at EZY, but didn't want to acknowledge that the only reason they were in the RHS given their zero experience, was because of £$.

Oh the irony of it all. :ugh:

I told many they were making a huge mistake, but got told once or twice I didn't know what I was talking about and Monarch were on to big things, but hey what do I know, only been flying 20yrs. One cadet put on FB good riddance EJ shove your spirit up your arse, that was only around 6 moths ago, wonder what they're thinking now as i'm sure they will be the first to go.

Now they did sign up to it and knew the deal with EJ, plus they were getting lots of experience on a popular type. Maybe they should have tried the way it was years ago when you had to instruct for a few years earning peanuts before getting into a airline and working your way up.

Anyway I hope Monarch pull through and I wouldn't wish the threat of redundancy on anyone. Good luck to all.

So Davina reckons the those who fled to MON are coming back? Is that the same Davina who claims cabin crew earn £40k? I wouldn't hold my breath, but stranger things have happened at the Big Easy.

Maybe we can just for a second or so forget MPL CTC EZY and get back on topic.

Two words to those "low only jet experience" guys caught up in a ezy/Monarch dilemma or MPL and no job

CAVEAT EMPTOR

and two words to those further into their careers and now up against it - I've been where you are it's not pleasant

GOOD LUCK :ok:

I don't suppose many of the ex EZY guys at Monarch will loose too much sleep about not returning to EZY as nearly all them are heading for BA!

The people at Monarch who will suffer the most are the experienced F/Os who don't have the protection of CTC, nearly every door is closed to us and we will end up in the Middle East whether we like it or not. We are also slightly older and on the whole have wives, children and mortgages to worry about, and not just concerned with paying off a training loan.

Proper careers are protected by industry regulators and unions/lobby groups who help to hammer out those regulations. Proper careers guarantee those with experience; the most to lose and the least to gain from unemployment, the right to further employability. The recruitment preferences of our airlines has led to a system where one's experience doing the job works directly against one's employability. How obscenely strange is that?