Boiling up 'Again' in Aer Lingus

FlutterinBantam

Looks like the cabin crew and Herr Mueller are on collision course yet again.

How many man hours have been wasted in arbitration and discussions when the 'agreements' always come to stand-offs?

As soon as the first cabin crew member is disciplined next week, it will set of the whole thing again.

I feel sorry for the person who is trying to do their job,and is constantly under some threat .


There has to be a better way to do business.

No other company in Ireland has such a volatile industrial relations history.


What the fook is wrong out there??

Su Campu

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Looks like the cabin crew and Herr Mueller are on collision course yet again.

How many man hours have been wasted in arbitration and discussions when the 'agreements' always come to stand-offs?

As soon as the first cabin crew member is disciplined next week, it will set of the whole thing again.

I feel sorry for the person who is trying to do their job,and is constantly under some threat .


There has to be a better way to do business.

No other company in Ireland has such a volatile industrial relations history.


What the fook is wrong out there??

One word - Unions

3DataModem

They are running at approximately twice the headcount per aircraft than their main competitors, and pay higher wages.

If this is not dealt with, it is only a matter of time before they are out of business. The unions fight this at every turn, so it's a question of whether the unions are broken before it's too late to save the airline.

bladeruner

3DataModem wrote: »

They are running at approximately twice the headcount per aircraft than their main competitors, and pay higher wages.
.

i did not realise they had twice as many staff per aircraft.
Do you have a link to this information please?

Mc Love

Thats utter bull 3DM - they dont have enough crew to man the planes, sending out texts two or three times everyday for volunteers to work. Its time management cut crew some slack!

EDIT: At OP - have you a link to the story of a crew member being disciplined?

3DataModem

Mc Love you misunderstood. I implied no criticism of crew.

Ryanair employs 7k people and has about 200 planes... 35 per plane.
Aer Lingus has about 4k people and about 45 planes... 90 per plane.

Those people cost money. That money comes from fares. Unless staff costs are cut Aer Lingus will either make a loss or charge more... either option is guaranteed route out of business.

Andrew33

AL's share price continues to climb which would suggest the markets are on Muellers side.

Mc Love

3DataModem wrote: »

Mc Love you misunderstood. I implied no criticism of crew.

Ryanair employs 7k people and has about 200 planes... 35 per plane.
Aer Lingus has about 4k people and about 45 planes... 90 per plane.

Those people cost money. That money comes from fares. Unless staff costs are cut Aer Lingus will either make a loss or charge more... either option is guaranteed route out of business.

No problem 3DM, I dont think that crew should take the slack, they are basically the frontline of the company, you reduce their pay, you are certainly going to see a change in attitude amongst staff. It will be like taking ryanair flight but you are in an Aer Lingus plane being served by EI crew.

FlutterinBantam

Mc Love wrote: »

Thats utter bull 3DM - they dont have enough crew to man the planes, sending out texts two or three times everyday for volunteers to work. Its time management cut crew some slack!

EDIT: At OP - have you a link to the story of a crew member being disciplined?

No! but I might have next week

ted1

i avoid aer lingus because of the constant threat of strikes. They'll be no jobs for them if the staff keep this ****e up

Bearcat

one ccm already suspended.............fun and games next week

xflyer

McLove, I'm sorry but your comments all too vividly demonstrate what's wrong with far too many people in Aer Lingus and frankly in the wider country. Apparently the CC in Aer Lingus haven't grasped the reality of the situation they face. If they want to keep their jobs they need to take pay cuts and work longer hours. If they don't then will soon be discussing how unfair it is in the dole queue along with the rest of Aer Lingus.

People need a reality check.

I heard of a similar situation involving nurses. One stood up in a meeting with the CEO of a private hospital and complained about the unfairness of having to work a 40 hour week instead of a 35 hour week compared to nurses in public hospitals.

Cabin crew in Aer Lingus have a similar mentality, if they don't like it then quit and try and find a job in the real world. Try working as a waitress or in a shop and then whinge about low pay and long hours.

donkey balls

bladeruner wrote: »

Not entirely accurate 3DM,
Ryanair subcontracts vast levels of staffing out to third parties ,virtually all of their ground handling, alot of their cabin crew and pilot training,not to mention the actual pilots and cabin crew themselves, and some maintenance.
None of these third parties show up on the staffing numbers ,but it still comes off the bottom line.
so you are not comparing like with like .

Also I would still love to see the source of the employment figures if you have it handy. Im just curious .

FR do all their own type rating these days and the captains that do the line training are FR employees,although all new hires go through brookfield as contractors.

Mc Love

xflyer wrote: »

McLove, I'm sorry but your comments all too vividly demonstrate what's wrong with far too many people in Aer Lingus and frankly in the wider country. Apparently the CC in Aer Lingus haven't grasped the reality of the situation they face. If they want to keep their jobs they need to take pay cuts and work longer hours. If they don't then will soon be discussing how unfair it is in the dole queue along with the rest of Aer Lingus.

People need a reality check.

I heard of a similar situation involving nurses. One stood up in a meeting with the CEO of a private hospital and complained about the unfairness of having to work a 40 hour week instead of a 35 hour week compared to nurses in public hospitals.

Cabin crew in Aer Lingus have a similar mentality, if they don't like it then quit and try and find a job in the real world. Try working as a waitress or in a shop and then whinge about low pay and long hours.

I think the facts stand for themselves, its much harder for CC in EI than it was lets say 2 or 3 years ago. They have already had their pay cut and numerous benefits withdrawn, if anything else is taken away from them, its not going to stand the company well in terms of customer service which I am sure will suffer at the hands of mueller

FlutterinBantam

Staying on topic, I did not realise that one member of the cabin crew of EI had been suspended.

That's the touch paper lit and I feel it could be end game from now on in.

It would appear to me that the old conditions and privileges have sweetened the cabin crew staff to expect a standard which falls short of today's commercial reality.

I fully accept that, more than most, the airline industry has fallen from a high earning and secure occupation, to a low cost, low level industry, which seems to be bottoming out rapidly to the detriment of those senior front line people who remember the good times.

They are spinning rapidly:cool:

Mc Love

If EI do strike due to a fellow crew member being disciplined, I am to believe that EI senior management wont hesitate on firing crew

vintac34

Have to agree with xflyer ,sums the position up very well!
As i see it ...,

Could it be a small group of militant union activists leading their followers down Redundant Road and end up like SRT??
Its time for anyone with a job to think hard before walking out!..
Wake up and smell the coffee before the aroma vanishes for good

bkehoe

donkey balls wrote: »

FR do all their own type rating these days and the captains that do the line training are FR employees,although all new hires go through brookfield as contractors.

CAE do the type ratings.

munchkin_utd

soooooooo - 1 (one) member of staff is somehow not in oneness and happiness with the airline people that be

so for this single solitary humpy f*ck, I may miss the weding of my best mate and for the hell of it loose the guts of 400 euro in pre booked hotel and car hire if they strike
And thats hoping that i get my 300 euros refunded of my flight from aer cunnilungus separate from the the above costs

Tramps

Dacian

I think some people can be very quick to pounce on others without knowing all the facts.........

saeglopur

Well said Dacian. It seems every time EI is mentioned on these boards a certain amount of untrue pre conceived ideas about the airline are regurgitated.
Hopefully there will be some movement in the dispute this week

efb

I find Aer Lingus an awful airline to fly with.

Flight crew not one bit helpful.

BMI no1 to heathrow for me.

At least Ryanair you know what your getting

efb

Try leaving your desk at 10 back at 8.

Who finishes at 5? (PS Excepted)

Bearcat

efb wrote: »

I find Aer Lingus an awful airline to fly with.

Flight crew not one bit helpful.

BMI no1 to heathrow for me.

At least Ryanair you know what your getting

praytell....what happened? Flightcrew or cabin crew has u out of sorts?

I think the whole row boils down to the interpretation of the greenfield agreement as in parts it's very vague so one group latches on to one thing and vica versa. A well versed game on behalf of the co. imo going into the quiet time of year.............brinkmanship at its very best. The markets like what mueller and his team are acheiving though. I cant see flights being cancelled.

Stimpyone

CCM was suspended last week for an issue regarding roistering specifically the amount of hours worked. CCM is now facing disciplinary action.

Unions have responded by working to rule ( i.e. not going on strike ).

EI have not got enough CC to crew their flights. Crew Control are texting off duty CCM's at least twice a day in order to get aircraft in the air.

Normally I abhor unions, but in this case the actions of EI management seems bizarre.

Stimpyone

Bearcat wrote: »

I cant see flights being cancelled.

Flights will be cancelled If CC work to rule simply because they won't have the staff to crew the flights.

And on a side note PAX numbers seem to be up for this time of the year.

Andrew33

efb wrote: »

I find Aer Lingus an awful airline to fly with.

Flight crew not one bit helpful.

BMI no1 to heathrow for me.

At least Ryanair you know what your getting

I did have one bad experience with AL cabin crew (one member to be specific, she went to the trouble of getting the F/O to gimme the once over) but generally they're decent people, not dolly birds. As regards Ryanair cabin crew? they're pretty decent too but they've gained this rep of being ogres (unfairly in my opinion) so both airlines are still being "typecast" in my opinion.

Dotsie~tmp

AerLingus is probably worth more to break up than run with the cash position and slots. Somebody will buy it.

xflyer

A strange and out of date comment. In March of this year the cabin crew along with ALL STAFF in Aer Lingus ACCEPTED the MUTUALLY AGREED Greenfield plan.

For cabin crew this entailed:
1)a pay cut,
2)a 3 year pay freeze (on top of an existing 2 year one),
3)10 days less holidays per year,
4) less staff on longhaul flights
5)15-20% productivity increase (ie more hours worked)
6)less hours off between flights (currently down to 11 hours, imagine finishing in the office at 5PM and having to be back at your desk at 4AM)

All of this WAS ACCEPTED by the cabin crew.

That's all very well and fine but what was the baseline they were working from?
1)A pay cut from what? The assumption we must make was that it was relatively high and unsustainable.
2)3 year pay freeze, welcome to the way things are in modern Ireland.
3)10 days less holidays. Generally most people have about 20 to 23 days a year. How many did AL staff have, 30? 40? or are they now forced to make do with 10 days off a year?
4)less crew on longhaul, that implies overstaffing. Correct me if I'm wrong!
5)15-20%, more hours. I refer you to my comment in number 2.
6) less hours off. Well 11 hours off is the legal minimum. I don't have to imagine it, I live it regularly. It's a fact of life and has been for shift workers for many, many years.

As for you comment about moving from a 40 hour to a 60 hour week. I don't know what the roster arrangement is but of course it will be averaged. I used to work a similar arrangement. 60 hours one week, 24 the next. That averaged a 42 hour week. Which meant built in overtime and a shift allowance. Again perfectly normal in many private sector companies. Do you actually believe or expect us to believe that cabin crew above all other staff will have work a 60 hours every week? Pull the other one!

You just reinforce my point about the lack of reality being demonstrated. I would say that even after these changes most are still better off than the majority doing equivalent in most private sector companies. If the company has decided to try and most the goalposts again. Then it implies there is still plenty of fat in the system.

I have a relative working there and a friend or two. They know the way the wind is blowing. It's a pity others do not.

Andrew33

Dotsie~tmp wrote: »

AerLingus is probably worth more to break up than run with the cash position and slots. Somebody will buy it.

Is that what anybody really wants? this is a typical example of the global attitude nowadays, what anything is worth in pounds/shillings/pence or Euro/cents to be upto date.
So lets take the argument that it'd be better to just sell the whole airline as a going concern, if previous posts are to be believed (and I've no reason to think otherwise) AL is at/or pretty close to "breakeven" and has almost a billion in cash reserves. F**kin hell, why would you sell that? if anybody bought it, you can be guaranteed they'd strip out the cash reserve, the name and anything else not nailed down and sell on the corpse. I suppose that's what Ireland is all about right now. I'm so sick of this mentality.

Mc Love

@xflyer, you raise the problems of working a 60 hr week, would you still work that 60 hour week if you only got paid for the first 35/40 hours???

I am guessing, no!

good post dacian!!

Locker10a

i am no union fan but from what ive heard from the story so far Aer Lingus Managment are way out of line!! Cabin crew know they must work to save the company and thats whay they were willing to help and do their bit in the form of greenfield and various other pay cuts over the years because from my experiance they are passionate and enjoy lying for Aer Lingus !
Aer Lingus have thrown this in their faces.
I was very disapointed to see them bully tactics being pulled out of the bag ! Threatning them with dissmissal etc . Very disapointing , Managment are obvisouly not will to work out a solution .
I mean come on ever Ryanair gives their cabin crew their 2 days off at a time! I have heard from several sources that Aer Lingus are infact short staffed so who ever says they have to much staff are not with it!
As a regular flyer with Aer Lingus i will avoid them for a while as im disapointed with managments treatment of staff. I was planning to fly Knock - London with them ( a route that woudl not be affected by industrial action btw) but i will consider otherwise as i dont want to suppert a company who bullies staff like this:( .
Shame on you Aer Lingus.
(Is firing staff for taking part inIndustrial action not Illegal in Ireland ? )

xflyer

Mc Love wrote: »

@xflyer, you raise the problems of working a 60 hr week, would you still work that 60 hour week if you only got paid for the first 35/40 hours???

I am guessing, no!

good post dacian!!

You cannot seriously expect us to believe CC are expected to work 60 hours every week? Is that what you are saying? Is that what you believe? :rolleyes:

So I looked it up. The new roster would expect CC to work 60 hours in a seven day period. That usually amounts to five 12 hour days with a couple of days off in the middle. As I haven't seen the new roster, Impact haven't allowed us to see for ourselves. I can only speculate but usually there follows a shorter working week or a period of time off followed by another 60 hour week which no doubt will average out as a 40 hour week over the year.

To say they work a 60 hour week but only get paid for 35/40 is just clearly not true.

The aim being to get 850 hours a year flying time for each member. Need I remind you that 850 divided by 52 is 16.34 hours a week or about 71 hours a month. Non flying duty hours are therefore 35.5 hours in a 60 hour week. Only 24.5 hours of the week are spent in the aircraft.

Now I'm not pulling the O'Leary tactic when he claimed that pilots only worked a 17 hour week. Ignoring the fact that duty hours are part of the job even though most of his pilots are only paid per flying hour as am I might add. Duty hours are part of the working day.

So don't come on here and try the opposite and spouting stuff about working a 60 week for 35 hours pay. Some of us weren't born yesterday and have been knocking around in this stupid business for too long.

To me this smacks of a union trying to exert some power and is dragging it's gullible members into confronting Mueller. Mark my words, he will fire every last one of them. Meanwhile the rest of Aer Lingus will stand idly by and wonder what possessed the Cabin Crew to go on this Kamikaze mission.

Bearcat

xflyer wrote: »

. Mark my words, he will fire every last one of them. Meanwhile the rest of Aer Lingus will stand idly by and wonder what possessed the Cabin Crew to go on this Kamikaze mission.

if this happens= no airline=sucidal management techniques. Game on though.....:(

bladeruner

Xflyer , It does appear you are pulling an O leary on it by trying to simplify it by dividing 850 by anything.
900 hours is the annual flight duty total.
but you have disregarded the DUTY hours total. which is 190 hours per 28 days .

I respectfully suggest you research FTL's.

Smellsofsoap

xflyer wrote: »

To me this smacks of a union trying to exert some power and is dragging it's gullible members into confronting Mueller. Mark my words, he will fire every last one of them. Meanwhile the rest of Aer Lingus will stand idly by and wonder what possessed the Cabin Crew to go on this Kamikaze mission.

Just to clarify the union have been very calm in their dealings with EI. They instructed their members to continue to work the disputed rosters while they try to resolve the situation thorugh negotiations. SIPTU would have staged a walk-out. This isn't about 'exerting power' its about BOTH sides honouring their part of a agreement and then obeying the BINDING arbitration. The company are completely misinterpreting the LRC ruling.

Now you may disagree with the ruling or the rights/wrongs of the dispute but can you side with a company who enter into BINDING arbitration and then ignore it when they don't like what the outcome was?

xflyer wrote: »

You cannot seriously expect us to believe CC are expected to work 60 hours every week? Is that what you are saying? Is that what you believe?

If the rosters were balanced yes a long week would be balanced out by a following short week, hopefully equal to 40-45 hours per week over the year. In actual practise EI are not making fair and equal rosters. Its the fairness and equal distribution of the hours that is that problem. The wording of the company stance is '60 hours in a consecutive 7 days' so yes some crew are getting repetitive 60 hour weeks.

xflyer wrote: »

As I haven't seen the new roster, Impact haven't allowed us to see for ourselves.

So are you saying that the cabin crew union have possession of the roster? How is this? The company produce the roster and they are the ones imposing new conditions in it. The union are merely trying to get the company to honour their previous agreement. And are you EI staff that needs to see the roster, ask any cabin crew you meet....

Now I can see where Xflyer is coming from, I assume you work in the industry? The absolute minimum legal working conditions for European airlines is referred to as FTLs (flight time limitations). This document states that you can work up to 60 hours in a consecutive 7 day period. Some airlines do use these working conditions, I think Ryanair have them but am not 100% sure on that.

Now this pattern can be hard work but its doable if its a pattern. Correct me If I'm wrong but I believe FR and Easyjet crew do a pattern of flight (5-2-6-3) They do all earlies or all lates. This helps as you have blocks of work that you can adjust to. This allows the comapny to get the max work without inhibiting the employees ability to rest and be prepared for the next pattern.

EI are claiming that they need FTLs to reach productivity. In actual fact the biggest block to EI productivty is their rostering system. EI roster crew a mix of lates, earlies and longhaul in the same week. This 'pattern' increases the fatigue effects of shift work. Dozens of crew in recent weeks are doing 2 late days, then a wasted day due to needing 11 hours between duties, then 2 earlies. Now thats 4 days work in 5 days,if EI rostered them all earlies or all lates they could have gotten 5 shifts out of that crewmember.

Also EI are regularly rostering days off seperate so the 'pattern' becomes 5-1-4-1-5-2-4-1-5-1-6-2. Days off in bold.

In addition EI crew regularly achieved the maximum flying time of 900 hours per 12 months in the past. This was under conditions even more 'prohibitive to rostering' then the rules agreed in March. So if they can do it for some crew 4-5 years ago whats stopping EI using the system correctly and improving efficiencies without causing such friction.

This is what EI are imposing on their cabin crew even thought the LRC have told them not to do this "An “Aer Lingus solution” rather than the rigidities of specific FTL rules" (Page 9)

The EI contract is for 39 hours per week, now are you saying it absolutely fine for EI to unilaterally decide to change this to flight time limitation if they wish? Even though they have made an agreement with their staff in March?

I can understand your thinking if you yourself operate in an FTL enviroment. The FTLs aren't the nub of the problem, its the dishonesty and actions of the company that are causing this work 2 rule action.

If cabin crew follow the exact letter of the March agreement and the LRC ruling do you believe EI should dismiss them?

-The LRC actually stated that EI should not follow FTLs and should include certain 'legacies' options, EI have stated this week that these options are now abolished.
-The LRC stated that the current rules must be re-written to improve clarity, EI interprete this to mean they can abolish any rule they don't like.
-The LRC stated that the target of 850 should be gradually achieved and that reviews would monitor this. EI have pushed straight to 860+ hours target.
-The LRC stated that existing rules on duty length are maintained, EI have decided to ignore these rules.

xflyer

Thanks for that interesting and detailed reply, smellofsoap. I stand corrected on some points. As you can imagine. I'm more familiar with pilot FTLs and shifts.

However my original reply was prompted by the wholly distorted representation of the issue such as working sixty hours and getting paid for forty. Ludicrous statements like that cannot go unanswered. Also the list of concessions given in the Greenfield plan also highlighted how good the terms and conditions were before this. The one that stood out was giving up 10 days leave a year. That implied many staff had over 30 or more a year.

The roster you laid out does seem ridiculous. In fact I've seen several Aer Lingus rosters over the years. Some are amazingly complex, uneccessarily so. Your point is well made.

But the question arises as to why EI management are playing hardball on this issue? With CC above all other staff. Of course CC did reject the original agreement and very nearly got themselves all fired.

It's easy to point the finger and say 'unreasonable management'. But it seems to me a point is being made. I do believe CC and their union only have themselves to blame.

Mc Love

First off, great first post smellsofsoap

xflyer wrote: »

However my original reply was prompted by the wholly distorted representation of the issue such as working sixty hours and getting paid for forty. Ludicrous statements like that cannot go unanswered.

Xflyer, the statement I gave was only an indication of how cc felt, and from what I can see its pretty clear, EI expect cc to go above and below the call for peanuts, whether or not this a modern ireland, we are not a third world country and I dont think many people would stand for this kind of treatment in any company

balkanhawk

I read in the paper today that the pilots have balloted for industrial action. The result.has yet to be released. Anyone know the reason for the ballot?

Mc Love

Sometime in december I believe!

Mc Love

No disruption during the EI work to rule anyway! And now with the pilots being unhappy, I think Herr Mueller will start to sit up and smell whats cooking!

FlutterinBantam

balkanhawk wrote: »

I read in the paper today that the pilots have balloted for industrial action. The result.has yet to be released. Anyone know the reason for the ballot?

Rostering issues, I'm reliably informed.

Mc Love

It's looking like it could boil up again soon :eek:

Stevek101

Mc Love wrote: »

It's looking like it could boil up again soon :eek:

Why so?

Mc Love

Management have taken away all their concessions now so I have heard

FlutterinBantam

Interesting times ahead.

Stevek101

Conflicting message here. I read that a new contract was to be given and if accepted conditions would return to normal. This new contract was to help end the work to rule that has been ongoing.

Mc Love

I doubt any new contract would be accepted unless it was better than the last offer.

evergreen101

New Sheriff in charge of dept I heard since new year.
She has asked everyone to grow up and get on with rosters and gave back all travel perks in good faith!;)
Union silent so far...........

Mc Love

Impact are a joke to be fair!

Bessarion

evergreen101 wrote: »

New Sheriff in charge of dept I heard since new year.
She has asked everyone to grow up and get on with rosters and gave back all travel perks in good faith!
Union silent so far...........

Not true. The new 'roster policy' was issued on Thursday with no warning or notice to crew. The have been told the staff travel will return and the new policy will take effect from Jan 17th. No mention of good faith or people 'growing up'. No mention of what will happen if crew do not follow the new policy.
On the same day they got their roster for Jan 17-Feb 15 and were informed that all requests that had been entered for this period would NOT be honoured in "the interests of equity for all crew" Not sure how that is fair!

The issue arises from varying interpretations of the LRC arbitration of Sep 2010. The new roster abolishes the old rule book which the LRC advised be kept albeit in a slightly altered form. The LRC recognised the original Greenfiled deal of March 2010 but advised 4-5 extra changes to this in order to achieve the agreed productivity target. To paraphrase it "both parties must convene to issue a revised book of rules including the changes of the Greenfield plan and this arbitration document to ensure mutual clarity. This shall not be a new negotiation process" (LRC original emphasis,not mine)

It is not an issue of employees refusing to change. The cabin crew have agreed on the productivity goal, they want to reach it so that they and the company can move forward. However EI have gone back on their work 3-4 times in the last 12 months and are continuing to enforce unilateral contract change on the cabin crew. Its an issue of honoring a contract you made with your employees. Regardless of the nuts and bolts of this case EI has consistantly fueled this argument by breaking their word and going beyond the scope of any mutual deal with 1/3 of their workforce. So much for mutual respect!

Timeline:
-March 2010, cabin agree to the Greenfield deal.
-1 month later EI insist the mutually agreed deal will not achieve stated targets.
-LRC called in to issue an arbitration.
-LRC arbitration delayed so EI go ahead and announce new contracts and working conditions in July.
-Cabin crew work these conditions for 3 months to show good faith.
-LRC arbitration issued in Sep 2010.
-EI ignore the advise for a gradual increase of productivity and start to introduce additional changes which were never negotiated.
-Cabin crew vote for work to rule.