Outsourcing at Aer Lingus

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 Yes the company wants (and probably needs) to control the baggage hall which is still outdated however on pure pax numbers the EI ground staff at Dublin are more efficient than any handling agents there.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

Tenger

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

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.

I respectfully disagree with your assessment that the current business plan is a viable option for long term survival. There are serious holes in the current plan that the management is refusing to discuss,with oil dropping fast the company is refusing to alter an estimate than was based mostly on the price of oil.................listen to the half year results and DM himself will confirm this.

I believe the current plan is a short term solution that does not position the airline for expansion after the current downturn is over. It merely aims to balance the books so the managers can get a bonus. Have the offered a plan (a la Willie Walsh) for where they want to be in 2-3 years? No is the answer as they are only thinking to the end of 2009. The plan will cut costs dramatically which will make DM look great as an accountant,but as a strategic decision the plan reduces the ability of EI to emerge stronger and more dynamic rather than just cheaper in 2-3 years. (The WW business plan had a plan of 4 years,2003-2006, and a stated goal which was to be ready for privatisation. WW did the ground work and preparation,got snapped up by BA,DM stepped in and got a bonus for signing a piece of paper!)

The plan will erode the EI brand image that has helped it to survive so far in the face of ferocious competion form FR,the king of LCCs in Europe. Without presenting itself as an alternative to FR on shorthaul or offering value and choice on,longhaul EI will gradually contract and die.

FlutterinBantam

All I can do is point to the last number of years.

How many times have FR been threatened by strike?....0
How many times hve EI been threatened by strike?? 3 or 4 at least.

The low fares model cannot survive when certain baggage handlers earn circa 70-80k pa incl o/t and shift pay.

That's what my sources tell me and they are reliable.

far too much time seems to be wasted in endless meetings and firefighting around strikes/HR/IR and every other fiddly change which is need to reduce the cost base.

Work practices are arcane and outdated and from what i am told haven't really changed much for years.

CDfm

Bramble wrote: »

I respectfully disagree with your assessment that the current business plan is a viable option for long term survival.

I believe the current plan is a short term solution that does not position the airline for expansion after the current downturn is over. It merely aims to balance the books so the managers can get a bonus. Have the offered a plan (a la Willie Walsh) for where they want to be in 2-3 years?

The plan will erode the EI brand image that has helped it to survive so far in the face of ferocious competion form FR,the king of LCCs in Europe. Without presenting itself as an alternative to FR on shorthaul or offering value and choice on,longhaul EI will gradually contract and die.

Willie Walsh was competant in EL but a disaster in BA.

To even remotely suggest tat EL has any kind of cache as a brand is with value other than as an Airline that was gifted Heathrow slots etc is a real hoot.

Tenger

CDfm wrote: »

To even remotely suggest tat EL has any kind of cache as a brand is with value other than as an Airline that was gifted Heathrow slots etc is a real hoot.

Do you mean cachet? If so I am not suggesting that EI is currently an airline that demands great respect in aviation. (Which historically it did, EI trained cabin crew were highly prized in aviation circles up to 10 years ago,strangely enough around the time I joined up.............)I am referring to the current EI brand being an alternative to the FR brand. If the current brand becomes indistinguishable from FR then EI will fade and die. EI must offer a choice to the passenger rather than just a differen colour plane.

Fluterrin' comparison is unfair; FR staff are unable to strike as you need a union to organise a strike under Irish employment regs. Many FR staff are contractors so further unable to do any form of industrial action. Unhappy FR staff leave. You must remember that industrial action is not illegal and if permitted is often the only way for employees to make their point to employers....(what ever happen to the confucian idea that employers had a duty towards their employees?......to paraphrase the man!)

And yes loaders etc earning 70K+ plus O/T is madness. I have always agreed with Flutterrin' that situations like this must be ended. This is a legacy of the selling of Team Air Lingus where EI was forced to take on any highly paid worker who did not want to become an FLS employee,they were taken on with existing terms and salary. Again the current EI struggling under the semi-state legacy.

FlutterinBantam

Bramble wrote: »

Do you mean cachet? If so I am not suggesting that EI is currently an airline that demands great respect in aviation. (Which historically it did, EI trained cabin crew were highly prized in aviation circles up to 10 years ago,strangely enough around the time I joined up.............)I am referring to the current EI brand being an alternative to the FR brand. If the current brand becomes indistinguishable from FR then EI will fade and die. EI must offer a choice to the passenger rather than just a differen colour plane.

Fluterrin' comparison is unfair; FR staff are unable to strike as you need a union to organise a strike under Irish employment regs. Many FR staff are contractors so further unable to do any form of industrial action. Unhappy FR staff leave. You must remember that industrial action is not illegal and if permitted is often the only way for employees to make their point to employers....(what ever happen to the confucian idea that employers had a duty towards their employees?......to paraphrase the man!)

And yes loaders etc earning 70K+ plus O/T is madness. I have always agreed with Flutterrin' that situations like this must be ended. This is a legacy of the selling of Team Air Lingus where EI was forced to take on any highly paid worker who did not want to become an FLS employee,they were taken on with existing terms and salary. Again the current EI struggling under the semi-state legacy.

Taken in the round... forget about Ryanair, what other company in this state was in the news more than Ei over the last five years on Industrial issues??

Anyone even close?.. remotely close?

That tells me anyway that something is seriously wrong out there, that some people ,whoever they may be , are ,well, not in the real world.
It tells me that some people have totally unrealistic expectations based on skills and current conditions.
It smacks of Neanderthals who want to wind the clock back and who think they are living in the 1970's and unfortunately these people hold a lot of influence amongst staff out there ,I'm told.

Hopefully things will work out,but anyone who cannot see that under the current EI model,drastic changes have to be made,is not a person who has the interest of the airline at heart.

Tenger

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Anyone even close?.. remotely close?

Touche! Point to FlutterinBantam

CDfm

Bramble wrote: »

Do you mean cachet? If so I am not suggesting that EI is currently an airline that demands great respect in aviation. (Which historically it did, EI trained cabin crew were highly prized in aviation circles up to 10 years ago,strangely enough around the time I joined up.............)I am referring to the current EI brand being an alternative to the FR brand. If the current brand becomes indistinguishable from FR then EI will fade and die. EI must offer a choice to the passenger rather than just a differen colour plane.

Fluterrin' comparison is unfair; FR staff are unable to strike as you need a union to organise a strike under Irish employment regs. Many FR staff are contractors so further unable to do any form of industrial action. Unhappy FR staff leave. You must remember that industrial action is not illegal and if permitted is often the only way for employees to make their point to employers....(what ever happen to the confucian idea that employers had a duty towards their employees?......to paraphrase the man!)

And yes loaders etc earning 70K+ plus O/T is madness. I have always agreed with Flutterrin' that situations like this must be ended. This is a legacy of the selling of Team Air Lingus where EI was forced to take on any highly paid worker who did not want to become an FLS employee,they were taken on with existing terms and salary. Again the current EI struggling under the semi-state legacy.

but its 10 years ago

you cant turn back the clock

Tenger

CDfm wrote: »

but its 10 years ago

you cant turn back the clock

I'm not suggesting at all that the clock is turned back. I'm making the point that EI need a brand image that differentiates from FR. (For example Aldi/Lidl are pretty interchangeable with each other but different to Dunnes/Super Valu/Londis and different again from M&S.) I'm also mentioning that EI used to have a very different and strong brand image which was respected. Currently EI are in dire need of a coherent brand image,whatever than may be,and regardless of whether it has cachet or not.

CDfm

it doesnt work like that- marketing needs something factual or of value to hang its hat on.

it cant offer that- it would need more than a generic offering-and cant offer anything unique.

I cant see anything that can you?


if it needed coherent restructuring it would need a suitor that would bring money and exploit synergies and economies. Cant see that either.

Tenger

CDfm wrote: »

it doesnt work like that- marketing needs something factual or of value to hang its hat on.

it cant offer that- it would need more than a generic offering-and cant offer anything unique.

I cant see anything that can you?.

Look at the EI advert playing on Sky a loot recently...it shows self check-in, pre assigned seats, main airports and caring customer service........are these not factual enough for you?
EI previously had the mantra of 'Low fares Way Better'...........this seems like a marketing fact to me and a way of marketing the airline as an altenative to FR. You seem to want an super unique selling point such as "Fly EI as you get complementary x". Am not quite sure what you're saying.

CDfm wrote: »

if it needed coherent restructuring it would need a suitor that would bring money and exploit synergies and economies. Cant see that either.

EI has the money (EUR800M) what it lacks is dynamic vision to create a coherent company service/product/brand. DM has stated that he wants EI to remain 'independent'. Personally I would love to see a merger from a large international airline such as what happened to BD last week. As you say synergy and economies of scale will be vital to all airlines in the near future.

However I do not believe any airline will take an interest in EI with FR holding 30% of the stock. The only way would be for the govt to offer their share (24%) to another airline with strict rules concering the use of EIs LHR slots,assuming this airline has already purchased 7+% of the shares.