Outsourcing at Aer Lingus

FlutterinBantam

Hmmmmm.... EI thinking of outsourcing Ground Ops and cabin crews.

Would certainly save a lot of money as new work practices and conditions would undoubtedly ride in with that.

Can't figure out if it is a bit of a kite flying exercise or a serious plan???

End of Sep. will reveal a bit more I would expect.

workaccount

What's happening at the end of September?

FlutterinBantam

Aer Lingus expect to roll out their latest cost cutting plan,which may involve outsourcing all ground Operations in Ireland.

Obviously they have learned something from the BFS experience:cool:

*Kol*

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Aer Lingus expect to roll out their latest cost cutting plan,which may involve outsourcing all ground Operations in Ireland.

Obviously they have learned something from the BFS experience:cool:

I thought that outsourcing the ground handling was part of the tender earlier this year when the heavy maintenance was up for grabs? Did that not get awarded yet?

FlutterinBantam

You may be mixing it up with line maintenance and line service.

What I am referring to is the outsourcing of check in/passenger handling/baggage handling/catering/cargo.

As far as I know this has never been really in the mix,and would appear to be a major cost cutting exercise with huge ramifications.

*Kol*

I was thinking of the line maintenance.

mark 2008

I wonder does anyone at Aer Lingus and SIPTU realise the effect all this talk of cost cutting and possible industrial unrest has. As a passenger I'm holding off booking any more flights with them until things are sorted. I know management need to cut costs, but they are actually going to lose potential bookings now. I know the Unions want to defend their members jobs, but if there is any possibility of a strike, the company will lose more bookings and have to make even more cuts. As a passenger I would like to see Dermot Mannion and Jack O'Connor isssue a joint statement saying whatever their differences there will be no strikes, disruptions etc between now and Christmas.

OPENROAD

mark 2008 wrote: »

I wonder does anyone at Aer Lingus and SIPTU realise the effect all this talk of cost cutting and possible industrial unrest has. As a passenger I'm holding off booking any more flights with them until things are sorted. I know management need to cut costs, but they are actually going to lose potential bookings now. I know the Unions want to defend their members jobs, but if there is any possibility of a strike, the company will lose more bookings and have to make even more cuts. As a passenger I would like to see Dermot Mannion and Jack O'Connor isssue a joint statement saying whatever their differences there will be no strikes, disruptions etc between now and Christmas.

Unlikely they will, just book with someone else if you can.

Run_to_da_hills

They will end up just like Hibernian Insurance, all their customer service will come out of India. :eek:

OPENROAD

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

They will end up just like Hibernian Insurance, all their customer service will come out of India. :eek:

Quite possibly, but needs must, airlines are under pressure to cut costs so this may well be one of the ways they will reduce costs.

FlutterinBantam

Seems to be a bit of disagreement amongst board members.

Obviously such a drastic move would get the auld war horses clanking the sabres big time and the result could be very attritional indeed.

Interesting times ahead if the figures are anything to go by and the oil price stays over the $100.

New chairman Colm Barrington could be earning his crust fairly sharpish, when he takes over.

Former EI staffer and GPA exec as a matter if interest.

Tenger

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Seems to be a bit of disagreement amongst board members.

.....................New chairman Colm Barrington could be earning his crust fairly sharpish, when he takes over.

Former EI staffer and GPA exec as a matter if interest.

He has a good pedigree coming from GPA. Hope to see some new ideas from him.

I expect an announcement from DM on friday.

FlutterinBantam

Looks like next week will throw up a good few answers to the outsourcing plans.

Meetings Wednesday and Friday mat throw some more light on the situation I'm told.

I'm told Ei Mgmnt not interested in going thru the 18mth meeting fest which followed the last cost cutting exercise.

Interesting times ahead.

Tenger

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Looks like next week will throw up a good few answers to the outsourcing plans.

Meetings Wednesday and Friday mat throw some more light on the situation I'm told.

Interesting times ahead.

Personally I'm just happy that this time they are talking to the staff before the media. This and similar acts over the past 2 years have added to the IR strife at EI.
By talking to the staff rather than dictating, the management team 'should' have an easier time getting cost savings.

However a recent announcment from a female EI rep (can't recall her name)that all operations are "within budget" seems strangely chirpy considering DM warned of possible EUR100M losses in 2009,still want to see his explanation of that figure. Breaking even or up to 15M loss in 2008 to 100m down by end of 2009 is a big difference.

FlutterinBantam

To-morrow should shed some light on the "plan"

Tenger

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

To-morrow should shed some light on the "plan"

Well the new Chairman (Colm Barrington) has jusr flown in from Nice with EI. Obviously getting geared up for an announcement. I was told he looked quite relaxed and tanned.

FlutterinBantam

Was the yacht stored in the rear hold???


Will always look relaxed and tanned, take it from the auld Flutt;)

FlutterinBantam

The auld merde should hit the fan next week;)

Tenger

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

The auld merde should hit the fan next week;)

You're forward to that!

FlutterinBantam

Wow!!

Fairly hard hitting proposals there, There will be some scatther to get out if the terms are anyway decent!!

Ei obviously banking of the fact that a lot will go voluntarily.

steeo

8 weeks per year with a cap of 2 years

FlutterinBantam

Not too sure about that, but one thing is sure, looks like there won't be any place for wasters and malingerers in the new set up.

No harm really, these toerags generally made life difficult over the years my sources tell me.

I see also that Nov 01 is set up as the deadline,would expect that to be put back about a month.

Will certainly shake up the auld warhorses out there, thats for sure.:cool:

Tenger

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Not too sure about that, but one thing is sure, looks like there won't be any place for wasters and malingerers in the new set up.

I see also that Nov 01 is set up as the deadline,would expect that to be put back about a month.

6.1 news mentioned Nov 1st and Dec 1st. Heard George Hook venting on the radio earlier.

The redundancy in 2004 was 7000 per year of service with a max of 15 years (so 115,000) That package also had a minimum payoff of 40,000 which was stupid as the most junior (ie cheapest) staff all left and EI were left with ots of supervisors but few staff.

FlutterinBantam

Looks like a fairly draconian set up.

Anyone left will have a pay freeze, no increments guaranteed,increases on a performance basis,and a possible move to some handling agency.

Difficult to square the US cabin crews bit, they will hardly do an overnight into Dub in the morning and out again later that day???

Seems like a way to get rid of the "widebodies" amongst the cabin crew, hark back to the Jumbo days of one flt a week so I'm told.

best of luck anyway bramble, I'm sure it will work out for you.

Tenger

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Looks like a fairly draconian set up.

Anyone left will have a pay freeze, no increments guaranteed,increases on a performance basis,and a possible move to some handling agency.

Difficult to square the US cabin crews bit, they will hardly do an overnight into Dub in the morning and out again later that day???

Seems like a way to get rid of the "widebodies" amongst the cabin crew, hark back to the Jumbo days of one flt a week so I'm told.

best of luck anyway bramble, I'm sure it will work out for you.

I can swallow certain cut backs as long as they will increase the viability of EI. The current proposals don't do that. All they do is dramatically reduce staff costs. Will this translate into a more porfitable airline....in the short term yes....but lets see them expand in 2 years time when they realise they do not have the flexibility in their resources to do so and still attract passengers.
Personally I accept a pay freeze. But I can't see how this will help unless there is an increase in efficiency in many areas. There are a huge amount of supervisory positions in EI (In 2004 cabin crew had 1 manager,now we have 3,same job) which unless they contribute to the revenue stream should be culled. And yes there are alot of holdovers from the pre-Cahil plan years,they are an obvious group to target but EI management in the last 6 years must see things differently to me.

Foggy43

Listening to the media it looks as though this could turn into the future of Shannon rather than the future of Aer Lingus.

steeo

Bramble wrote: »

That package also had a minimum payoff of 40,000 which was stupid as the most junior (ie cheapest) staff all left and EI were left with ots of supervisors but few staff.

Why was it stupid ???

They got rid of cheap staff yes, in the short term but you add up wages, RDA, shift, pension contributions, holidays and FIL's over the next 30 years and that's a lot more than €40k.

Tenger

steeo wrote: »

Why was it stupid ???

They got rid of cheap staff yes, in the short term but you add up wages, RDA, shift, pension contributions, holidays and FIL's over the next 30 years and that's a lot more than €40k.

Because 12 months after the redundancy they needed to re-hire more staff. They had allowed the bottom rung of the rank structure to depart which left them with the more expensive mid to long term staff remaining. Mostly in supervisory postions. They also had to request cabin crew to volunteer to transfer to the ground for up to 12 months to cover the gaps in staffing.

As you say, over the course of 30 yrs these younger staff would cost a lot but younger staff with less memory would be more inclined to accept any changes to work practises. Ryanair have very few cabin crew with more than 10 years of experience,the majority are 2-3 years then move on.
The current group of younger EI staff may take the package but they should aim to target the staff who are in about 10-15 years. These are all appox mid 30s,still young enough to change career but worried about family and mortgages. These are the staff who have the potential to cost EI the most over the next 10-20 years. More senior staff may take the package as early retirement or may just stick it out for 4-5 years until they can retire.

FlutterinBantam

All this is of course, due in a large way to lack of any meaningful reform and changes over the last three years since EI went private and low cost.

Ok there was loads of shaping and arse boxing, but no real change.

As I kept pointing out nothing had really changed and the high cost base was the real problem.

Now at last looks like end game,as I notice all the usual escape avenues eg re deployment throughout the company have been boxed off, and a tight time frame set out.

I would expect a rush to take any offer, as the alternatives are at best:

Endure a winter of discontent with pay freeze

Work for a handling agency.

Limp along to retirement listening to the same auld crap year in year out.

Anyone within an asses roar or retirement will grab this chance with both hands I would suggest.

FlutterinBantam

I would suggest that the outsourcing of Cargo/baggage handling/cleaning/catering at Irish Airports, would be a strong objective for EI mgmnt.

This is what they really want to achieve,rest is less important.

I would imagine that at least at Dublin frontline check in staff might be retained on reduced conditions.

Pilots keeping very quiet I notice, their co-operation or lack of it would be crucial in how things pan out,as would be the SIPTU attitude Airport wide.


Interesting times ahead.

Fulton Crown

OPENROAD wrote: »

Unlikely they will, just book with someone else if you can.

As a fairly regular Lingus passenger would agree with above - will book trips with other airlines while this uncertainty exists - although would prefer to fly the National Airline.

What people must realise is that EI is a former featherbedded state enterprise which now finds itself a small player in a fiercly competitive and cutthroath market place and not to try and reduce cost base and increase efficiencies would be commercial suicide.

To put it more starkly - the airline will go to the wall if nothin is done.

From contributions of other seemingly well informed posters it appears that some of the practices and personnel more appropriate to the monopoly days have still to be weeded out.

A lot of responsibility on the trade union heads if this is going to be resolved would be the way I see it.

Tenger

Fulton Crown wrote: »

What people must realise is that EI is a former featherbedded state enterprise which now finds itself a small player in a fiercly competitive and cutthroath market place and not to try and reduce cost base and increase efficiencies would be commercial suicide..

Yes they are a small player and need to address their long term srategic postion. The current management do not seem to think long term. EI are CURRENTLY in a good position..800M in the bank,low number of weak routes,no plans to 'ground' planes over the winter,a staff base willing to lower costs. EI compete daily against the standard for Euro LCCs (Ryanair) at their home base. They stand up well against them which not many other carriers can claim. ANd at the moment EI are not facing a fight for survival as claimed by management..even with 3 figures losses they could technically last until 2014.

Fulton Crown wrote: »

From contributions of other seemingly well informed posters it appears that some of the practices and personnel more appropriate to the monopoly days have still to be weeded out..

Seismic changes have taken place since 2002. Yes the company wants (and probably needs) to control the baggage hall which is still outdated however on pure pax numbers the EI ground staff at Dublin are more efficient than any handling agents there.

You must remember that EI have made a profit 8 times in the 10 years 1998-2007. 2001 was due to 9/11 and 2006 losses were due to the 'exceptional costs' (EI official wording)associated with the privatisation. I'm not saying that cuts are not needed but the level of cuts is the crux of the problem.

Fulton Crown wrote: »

To put it more starkly - the airline will go to the wall if nothin is done...

I think the airline will go to the wall unless a more dynamic team are at the helm. EI do not seems to want to gain more revenue. You have a mentality that is clinging to the USA market when they should be lessening their reliance on a currently turbulent market. I realise this is a time of economic caution but EI cannot survive if they contract too far.

EI are applying short haul logic to long haul operations. On short haul, price is the major factor in choosing carriers. EI think this will work for longhaul. However look at all the larger airlines worldwide and you see them upgrading /improving their longhaul services/products. On long haul pax are willing to pay more for service.

Lets talk about the management who are refusing to examine alternative revenue generating strategies. IMPACT has presented studies on pax numbers flying to Canada and South Africa to the company,no action. 25,000 people per year fly to South Africa using EI as their carrier to LHR..this is an EI internal figure. This doesn't count pax to book 2 seperate tickets to their destination. The EI cabin crew agreed on a 'Fly Anywhere Agreement' which the company have still not used 2 years later. The EI Flight Ops staff have asked EI to try routes to Canada or the East. The company refuses to consider using the current EI ground staff to handle other airlines(thus getting more income from current resources)

On a very small level EI do not stock their aircraft correctly,so cabin crew always run out of stock on a close to capacity flight,all it takes is 20 extra pax on a normal flight ot empty the food cart. More stock means more revenue, (lots of small amounts) 4 years after the introduction of the SkyCafe service and the cabin crew requests are still being ignored.

The document presented to staff states that the company refuses to "enter into discussion over revenue generating strategies"

In harsh terms I can see the logic of pulling out of Shannon. Its not productive and costs too much for its yield. Sad but true. Also catering and cleaning are obvious targets to outsource. Outsourcing check-in,boarding staff will create too much inflexibilty into a resource that is already overstretched due staff cuts. And outsourcing cabin crew to the US will erode the major selling point to EI compared to American/UsAir/Continental/Delta,(their USA number is 1800-IrishAir) this will cancel the actual savings it would create. While the proposed usage of these
US crew (longhaul only) seems efficient it does not allow for any disruptions to the operation that having all crew in a single base(doing both short and longhaul) allows.


Sorry for long post.

Hockey Chick

Do you work for Aerlingus??

FlutterinBantam

Hmmm .. things fairly on sched. as they say in the airline business.

Talks with the Oonions broke down(quelle surprise)today.

Buy a few shares in Servisair good each way bet.

Could be a lot of anger soonish:(

Tenger

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Talks with the Oonions broke down(quelle surprise)today.
Could be a lot of anger soonish:(

From what I heard the talks were never going to achieve anything as the company wasn't interested in listening.

A mate of mine was at 3 meetings between IMPACT and management last week as part of the union group. The company rejected every single cost saving proposal the cabin crew union presented. In addition to this the head of EI Human Resources spend 2 of the meetings texting on her phone rather than actually taking part. The company reps also refused to allow any discussion of the impact on costs due to the recent drop in oil prices. With an attitude like this on one side of the table nothing was ever going to be agreed.

And on top of this Dermot Mannion went off on a weeks holiday on Monday in the middle of what he calls a 'fight for viability for the airline'....this shows that A) he is lying about the scale of the crisis, B)He doesn't care for the staff or most worrying C) He doesn't care what happens to EI in the long term.

Of course there will be anger. I have no problem with cost cuts if needed but at the moment EI are pushing for cost cuts that cannot be backed up. Yes some cuts are needed but not up to the tune of 74M with all ground ops outsourced. Airlines are doing badly at the moment but EI is in a relatively secure position in Europe,as others airlines (excepting FR) do not have the cash reserves to last the downturn.


You seems to take great pleasure in slagging the unions at EI. Unfortunately they are a neccessary evil at EI. You often mention the 'auld warhorses'. Well I can tell you that out of 1350 cabin crew I would guess that there are approx 50-70 of those auld warhorses left (I'm using 30+ years service,nearing retirement,can remember the B747 being introduced as the guideline) So those auld warhorse are a very small minority among cabin crew at least. The people being most affected by these cuts are enthusiastic staff with 5-12 years service who want to work for EI.

At the same time EI are losing revenue every day onboard as they are not listening to the feedback from cabin crew concerning the service onboard. They refuse to carry more stock,refuse to try different items that pax ask for.

PhoenixRising

Well said Bramble.

Aer Lingus management need to be outsourced, not the staff.

FlutterinBantam

Indeed,well said Bramble,as I said before, if a lot of the staff out there had your attitude EI wouldn't be in the situation they are in,and would have a better chance of getting out of it.

However,that been said,and with an economists hat on I have been saying for yonks what the problem is.

When EI went low cost that mismatch of cost base versus income became exacerbated and it was only Govt. interference and Berties interference that postponed what had to be done.

It's not a coincidence that as soon as the Govt. effectively slung it's hook things start to happen.

I have traveled long haul on EI several times this year and frankly the attitude/work ethic/decorum of the cabin crew would NOT impress me one little bit.Less than enthusiastic is the most kindly way I could describe it.

There are some people out there who have been living in cloud cuckoo land for a long time and refused to confront reality.

I'm sorry that good people like you are caught up in this,but this should have been sorted out years ago, but no one had the balls or the foresight to do it, and I refer to all sides.

Tenger

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I have traveled long haul on EI several times this year and frankly the attitude/work ethic/decorum of the cabin crew would NOT impress me one little bit.Less than enthusiastic is the most kindly way I could describe it..

Personally hate doing longhaul. The service is terrible,the cabins are below par,and with the crew at minimum levels the staff are unable to actually take time and interact with passengers. And I do agree that service levels have dropped in the last 2 years.
EI ignored requests by cabin crew to train new crew on A330 routes by merit rather than all at once as they did(all crew start on A320/1 then get A330 when permanent) Therefore EI trained some crew on longhaul routes after less than 3 months experience. These crew had not had sufficient line training/experience to deal correctly with pax,due to the handling of the recruitment drive some had never had any previous customer service experience which is disgraceful for the position they are in. While the day-to-day job looks like just tea/coffee you need to able to handle any type of problem/altercation with/between pax in an enclosed area discretely.

TBH some new (and generally early 20's) crew see longhaul flights as a way to get to the states rather than actaul work. They focus on the end of the flights when they should be focusing on the pax. Again EI dropped the recruitment age against the wishes of the existing cabin crew training staff.

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

......................but this should have been sorted out years ago, but no one had the balls or the foresight to do it, and I refer to all sides.

True enough.

The guy before Willie Walsh had a plan (supported a the time by WW) to downsize the airline from semi-state levels. He was determined to maintain core staff only, ground staff,cabin crew pilots and a couple of other sections. However his plan was not unpopular with middle/senior managers. He was chased out by the sexual harrassment case. To show how preposperous it was,one of the women involved was FlutterinBantam's stereotypical Auld warhorses! No way the guy would have approached her as she was older than the CEO! The other was the PA for Mary O'Rourkes nephew who was going to be out of a job as EI middle management. Think the CEO's name was Micheal Foley,he went back to Heinekein USA after that. Think he then got involved with Aer Arann.

White_Feather

Bramble wrote: »

Personally hate doing longhaul. The service is terrible,the cabins are below par,and with the crew at minimum levels the staff are unable to actually take time and interact with passengers. And I do agree that service levels have dropped in the last 2 years.

TBH some new (and generally early 20's) crew see longhaul flights as a way to get to the states rather than actaul work. They focus on the end of the flights when they should be focusing on the pax. Again EI dropped the recruitment age against the wishes of the existing cabin crew training staff.

It is very annoying on long haul sometimes. Its generally all rush rush rush. But sure you said it yourself, we just dont have the proper resources to provide a top class service. I find it quite embarressing sometimes, both on shorthaul and long haul.

I would have to disagree with you there about younger crew. I am in my early 20's but tbh, the minute I start work, Im working. I dont concentrate about what im going to buy down on canal street, I concentrate on the passengers. I will always do my up most best to meet their requests. I know you didnt say it was all crew but i think its unfair to say its mainly the younger crew.

Davidth88

Bramble

Your posts bring a interesting and very under plublished side of the story.

I grew up in the age when BA ( I am from Britain ) was coming out of BOAC/BEA days and the unions ruled the roost, to the point you had compulsory sick days etc .

My views of unions ( having never belonged to one ) are coloured by this TBH

If what you say is true ( and I have no doubt it is ) then why on earth am I not hearing this in the media , all I hear is the unions are going on strike blah blah blah.

The leadership of the unions have to fight fire with fire , tell these stories to the media , show the proposals you gave to the company etc.

I truly hope EI survive, the offering they have on short haul is good, its the right mix of ' low cost ' without the ' cattle train ' mentality that exists in FR.

On long haul frankly the offering just isn't good enough , the aircraft are tatty ( remember the old SAS saying if you see a coffee stain on the table you wonder if the engines are maintained ) , I have never flown premier however your own photo of 1a/b shows its not a great offering by todays standards. The IFE is frankly rubbish.

Good luck in the future !

PS , I know of course the engines are maintained , but less informed people will think that way.

CDfm

Its inevitable there will be change.

The clock will never go back - AL was once synonymous with Irish air travel and dominated the skys- I personally have only been one 1 AL flight in 10 years.

If AL goes or is taken over no-one will miss it. Its just another airline - its only importance is to its workers.

Frankly I think all that is happening is that the end is being delayed - this recesion will probably break it and in 2 years time everyone will beg Michael O'Leary to take it over.
You will have massive redundancies and no money for massive payouts.

OH dear - everyone seems to be in a pickle about an airline no-one cares about anymore. Bye bye AL.

FlutterinBantam

Bit harsh there, plenty of people care other than the workers.

Unfortunately everybody has gone to the well too often to avoid major changes, which should have been seen by all parties 10 years ago.

It was the arseboxing by Unions/Mgmnt/Govt over the years that has the situation as it is now.

People just didn't see reality.

CDfm

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Bit harsh there, plenty of people care other than the workers.

Unfortunately everybody has gone to the well too often to avoid major changes, which should have been seen by all parties 10 years ago.

It was the arseboxing by Unions/Mgmnt/Govt over the years that has the situation as it is now.

People just didn't see reality.

Really though -it was never about running an Airline properly for the public even when it was in public ownership - it was all about themselves and how much they could get.

Well - it looks like its all over now .....

Day -day - bye bye -ta ta

Tenger

White_Feather wrote: »

Its generally all rush rush rush. But sure you said it yourself, we just dont have the proper resources to provide a top class service.............I would have to disagree with you there about younger crew. ...................................I know you didnt say it was all crew but i think its unfair to say its mainly the younger crew.

I deserve the rebuff. There are some crew who don't see the pax as their priority which needs to addressed. And yes it can be a crewmember with any level of experience. From the 19 year old planning a shopping trip to a 37 year old mother who doesn't want to be there to the 60 year old lady who is counting down to retirement.

CDfm wrote: »

Really though -it was never about running an Airline properly for the public even when it was in public ownership - it was all about themselves and how much they could get.

Actually when it was in public ownership during the 80's EI was actually used by the government as a way of generating employment (probably along with other semi-states) If 500 jobs were lost somewhere the government would get the semi-states to take on 500 people. This is the legacy that EI have been fighting for since 2002.

penexpers

Bramble wrote: »

On long haul pax are willing to pay more for service.

I don't think Aer Lingus are competitive on long haul, especially on routes that are not served directly. e.g.

Dublin-Seattle (example picked out of the air) is $554 with AL/BA via LHR and AL/JetBlue via Boston is 691 euro.

Having flown BA but not AL long haul, by the sounds of it there is no comparison to the level of service.

CDfm

Bramble wrote: »

I deserve the rebuff. There are some crew who don't see the pax as their priority which needs to addressed. And yes it can be a crewmember with any level of experience. From the 19 year old planning a shopping trip to a 37 year old mother who doesn't want to be there to the 60 year old lady who is counting down to retirement.



Actually when it was in public ownership during the 80's EI was actually used by the government as a way of generating employment (probably along with other semi-states) If 500 jobs were lost somewhere the government would get the semi-states to take on 500 people. This is the legacy that EI have been fighting for since 2002.

Its about time the unions and worker directors actually show that they can cope with reality.

This is a grown up world - if its their job to provide leadership.

with the RyanAir takeover bid everyone hid behind state shareholdings and worker ownership trust - yet EL pulled out of Shannon.

So given that -why arent the worker directors actually safeguarding long term viability - or is it fair to ask whether or not the state appointees and the worker directors are capable of making any type of strategic plan ?

FlutterinBantam

What exactly can worker directors do about "safeguarding long term viability"??

CDfm

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

What exactly can worker directors do about "safeguarding long term viability"??

All directors have a legal responsibility to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders and even its creditors.

So, they have to put personal and political issues aside when dealing with company business. Of course, worker directors will represent worker interests as well but will owe their ultimate responsibility to "safeguarding the long term viability of the company"

It might be that this is best served via job cuts and changes in work practices and communicating "difficult" strategic views to workers and unions -so its not what can they do -its their duty to do so and if they cannot then its their duty to resign.

FlutterinBantam

Sorry, took you up wrongly there.

I have yet to hear of any worker directors in EI adopting that line however.

They seem to be elected mainly from hardline union ranks and I'm sure would find it difficult to openly support the current plan, even though in my opinion it is one of the few viable options if EI is to remain in business long term.

The writing was on the wall once Bertie stood down as Mr Cowan does not seem to be too interested in goings on at Dublin Airport, and Aer Lingus in particular.

CDfm

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Sorry, took you up wrongly there.

I have yet to hear of any worker directors in EI adopting that line however.

They seem to be elected mainly from hardline union ranks and I'm sure would find it difficult to openly support the current plan, even though in my opinion it is one of the few viable options if EI is to remain in business long term.

The writing was on the wall once Bertie stood down as Mr Cowan does not seem to be too interested in goings on at Dublin Airport, and Aer Lingus in particular.

Fairly rough on the workers that directors will put politics over long term stratwegies and job security.

Bertie had an interest as he had connections with union officals back to his school days- they will miss him.

FlutterinBantam

More interested in copper fastening their privileges as a result of their tenure as a WD perhaps??:cool: