Aer Lingus Job Cuts

FlutterinBantam

Heard about this on the radio yesterday and wonder whats happening?

Am I right in thinking that this is exactly the position Aer Lingus was in just prior to Willie Walshs departure?

The big difference then, was Aer Lingus was in state control and now they are not.Mr Walsh ,if I am correct was planning major cuts in costs and possible outsourcing of certain functions.

We all know what happened then,but the big question is what will happen now??

Will we see the cost cutting exercises proposed by Mr Walsh three years later?

tHE vAGGABOND

Everyone outside of the aer lingus unions knows that Aer Lingus is overstaffed to quite a large degree. There shall have to be .large cuts at some point. It seems that point will come sooner rather than later. The airline is not a state owned 'job center' any longer, its all about meeting profit forcasts and quaterly targets now.

The people that get let go will get a gigantic amount of money in a package [and free retraining etc] IMHO, so dont cry too hard for them tbh..

As you seem to know, Willie Walsh is no longer at Aer Lingus, he has gone on to bigger and better things and is headding up BA. I realise some union people may not like him, but I agree with many that he basically worked a miracle when he saved Aer Lingus a few years ago. Aer Lingus was very very close to collapse in the aftermath of September 11th. [loosing 2 million quid a day according to this article]

Check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Walsh

FlutterinBantam

I would agree with vagabond on a broad basis,however you may be off the mark in the assumption the those let go would recieve large amounts of dosh.

There has been a lot of staff shedding in AL over the past few years,I'm told,with generous packages on offer to those accepting voluntary redundancy. I would be very surprised if these packages would apply "ad infinitum" as it were.I'm sure the Company would say " You had your chance" or words to that effect.

One thing I am sure about though,is that there will be a lot of work practice/flexability issues to be ironed out as AL strives to match revenue with unit costs ,which I'm reliably informed are above industry norms for a low cost carrier.

TempestSabre

Personally I think all Willie Walsh did was the obvious cost cutting that needed to be done. But then He wasted a lot of money, for example in disputes with pilots that achieved nothing. Hes a one trick pony and will try the same thing in BA because that all he knows what to do. Fair play to him for getting where hes got, hes done well for himself. But I agree theres still a lot of bloat in Aer Lingus, especially on the management side where there they seemed to miss many of the previous culls. The unions are a bit useless, fighting over the wrong issue and then not standing up on the real issues.

People seem to forget that Aer Lingus and Ryan Air operate in two different markets. Would people prefer that Aer Lingus switch to be a low-cost carriers on short haul routes. Personally I wouldn't but at the end of the day a business has to turn a profit and is someone what constrained by market conditions.

Civilian_Target

Yep - jobs will go, and because they're union jobs, the bhoys will get a nice reduncancy cheque many will say they don't deserve.

Redundancy is a fact of life in todays employment market - at some point pretty much all of us will be made redundant, now is a good time to be let go because there's no shortage of other jobs about!

FlutterinBantam

TempestSabre wrote:

Personally I think all Willie Walsh did was the obvious cost cutting that needed to be done. But then He wasted a lot of money, for example in disputes with pilots that achieved nothing. Hes a one trick pony and will try the same thing in BA because that all he knows what to do. Fair play to him for getting where hes got, hes done well for himself. But I agree theres still a lot of bloat in Aer Lingus, especially on the management side where there they seemed to miss many of the previous culls. The unions are a bit useless, fighting over the wrong issue and then not standing up on the real issues.

People seem to forget that Aer Lingus and Ryan Air operate in two different markets. Would people prefer that Aer Lingus switch to be a low-cost carriers on short haul routes. Personally I wouldn't but at the end of the day a business has to turn a profit and is someone what constrained by market conditions.

Well tempest I would agree with you in so far as Willie Walsh did the obvious.
Pay a lot of people a lot of money to leave,bit of a no brainer really.

You say the unions are fighting over the wrong issues.

What ,in your opinion are the right issues?

I find the last paragraph the most puzzling.
Aer Lingus are a low cost carrier on the short haul routes,but their unit costs are well above Ryanairs.

Thats the reason,inmho, for todays and the current kerfuffle.

Mr mannion NOW has to do what Willie walsh was apparently set to do just before he left.

In other words,the most difficult part of the process to return AL to sustained profitability.

TempestSabre

I don't think the low cost model of only serving one destination on a ticket and not having connecting flights is the same as one where you have connecting flights to other services. To me thats a fundamental difference. But these days its about making the maximum profit regardless of the quality of service or the quality of the working conditions.

In my experience the unions support their own wider agenda and not always the issues of the smaller group or branch thats immediately effected by a dispute. So disputes are often settled with very little being achieved for the people effected. I guess basically if you in a union you need to make sure that the union is fighting the same battle you are! If not switch union.

FlutterinBantam

Yes indeed ,I take your point in respect of the point to point carrier vs the one who has connectivity built into its operating ethos.

To me ,skimming over the threads on this forum,there seems to be a vast difference in the job security in the pvt sector vs the public or semi state.

I think work practices will be the next battleground in the AL "saga" as previously entrenched positions are rattled and attempts made to increase productivity,and job flexability.

There seems to be quite a concensus on this thread that AL are over staffed and I would be interested to see your views on where the Unions should go to fight this battle

DublinWriter

FlutterinBantam wrote:

We all know what happened then,but the big question is what will happen now??

Of course it will. There's still a lot of fat on that puppy.

There's was an interesting set of stats in the SBP about 2 weeks ago comparing AL with RA in terms of employee numbers and profitability and numbers of flights.

AL is still in the ha'penny place. Shocking to think that in the 80's they had something like 4 times the staff they employ today.

TempestSabre

In fairness the quality of service and attention to detail was a lot better then. While I take the point that every business has to make a profit, you don't have to run a slave shop to do it, and make it a victorian workhouse to boot. There should be a balance between doing a job well and having some quality of life.

In Aer Lingus from what I've heard 2nd hand it seems incredibly top heavy in terms of management. I will agree that the semi states and public sector have a serious problem with productivity, job flexability and accountability. But I wouldn't rush to throw away hard won working conditions in those sectors. We have companies making many millions in profit, but yet not paying sick pay, maternity pay, no sick leave and greatly reduced pensions. Ultimately the profits seems to be at the expense of longer working hours and poorer quality of life for staff.

Contracting also erodes the skillset of staff and ultimately drives down the cost to inscrease profits, but those profits are usually only passed on to the shareholders and directors. The staff that remain will just work harder.

Aer Lingus may still be enjoying a sheltered life from the "real world" and certainly it could lean up and become more effective. But every company doesn't have to be a Ryan Air.

FlutterinBantam

Agree with most of your stuff there tempest.

What I know about AL or any other "semi-state" is that a certain coterie of employees ,once they get established ,treat the place like a "banker".

In other words,have the guarenteed income,conditions,etc etc ,and then proceed to work these to the limit by doing the bare minimum, while pursuing other activities outside the company.

I fully agree that every company should not be a Ryanair,but there is a sensible medium point and from what I can see AL has bit to go to get to that point.

loyatemu

anyone let go will get a fat redundancy cheque purely because of the strength of the unions. same happened at Eircom even after they were privatised. Some people were walking away with 100k+.

FlutterinBantam

Hmmm. can't agree with you there.

People in AL GOT the chance to take vol. red. over the last few years.

Was there a similar scheme in Eircom??

Can't see a similar payout in the future.

I could be wrong though;)

TempestSabre

loyatemu wrote:

anyone let go will get a fat redundancy cheque purely because of the strength of the unions. same happened at Eircom even after they were privatised. Some people were walking away with 100k+.

I don't thing thats typical. Its usually 2-6 weeks per year of service. By law it only has to be 2 weeks I think.

The problem in Aer Lingus, especially for technical staff is there isn't another airline to go to. So you'll either be leaving the country or switching industry. Its a leap too far for many people. For the other staff they'll find it hard to get the same working conditions or strength of union in other industries. Even for those that might wish to leave, they'll be careful of crossing the unions.

I'd like to see a leaner keener AL but not at the expense of all that typified AL in the past. Personally when I get on a AL flight I feel I'm home. Thats not the case with other airlines. Maybe I'm just being sentimental.

irishproduce

I agree with tempest, sure we all love the odd cheap as chips flight, however I hope AL does not go down the Ryanair rad. There is definitely something nice about coming home on an AL flight.

Civilian_Target

Agreed - but there's no need for AL to become an ultra-low cost Ryanair-style carrier. However, it's certainly carrying a lot of excess senior managers, and they have to go, and probably will. Of course, I'm sure they won't be the only job cuts, but they'll be a significant saving.

At the end of the day, AL isn't moving to an entirely Ryanair model, what would be the point? People are still willing to pay a (small) premium to fly AL because they have nice things like leather seats, pouches in the back of the seats, and flights ot heathrow, and Ryanair is much better at being Ryanair than Aer Lingus will ever be!

penexpers

loyatemu wrote:

anyone let go will get a fat redundancy cheque purely because of the strength of the unions. same happened at Eircom even after they were privatised. Some people were walking away with 100k+.

Yeah. Walking away with 100k, the prospect of no other employment because no-one else wants to hire you, a reduced pension etc... The redundancy packages in Telecom Eireann used to be very generous but they have gradually being eroded. It's not as simple as it seems.

Civilian_Target

TE don't owe you a job! You chose to work to TE, and to be honest, if you can't pay for your own retraining for a new, better job (if that's what you want) with 100k you have serious issues.

Sonnenblumen

Some people will need to be told there's jam on the cake, others will be happy to know there's jam, whilst others will need to be shown where and what to do with the jam. I blame the Gove for creating such a mess of public sector syndrome - premium conditions for uncompetitive products/services.

Eddie Hobbs should do a series on this "Desperate Fat Cats".

FlutterinBantam

Agreed. We have a total imbalance between average public sector worker and pvt sector. With benchmarking etc. the public service have it made, with very little of the responsibilities of the pvt sector.

Unionised,over priviledged,job security, pensions, etc etc

Bertie referred to it briefly when he mentioned the four and a half day week in the health Service,but that was buried very quickly,did people notice??

TempestSabre

FlutterinBantam wrote:

Agreed. We have a total imbalance between average public sector worker and pvt sector. With benchmarking etc. the public service have it made, with very little of the responsibilities of the pvt sector.

Unionised,over priviledged,job security, pensions, etc etc

Bertie referred to it briefly when he mentioned the four and a half day week in the health Service,but that was buried very quickly,did people notice??

over priviledged wha da mean?