Bye Bye Aer Lingus

zootroid

Tipp Man wrote: »

On the contrary i thought it was brilliant management and highlighted a couple of things, 1) that the company wasn't going to take any more crap and 2) that the people who reject these offers need to realise the consequences of their actions,

so well done to the Aer Lingus management and hopefully they will have the balls to see this threat through. For too long unions have been running companies into the ground with their stupidty and complete lack of flexability, its about time companies bit back.

Same applies to the PS and the government, grow a pair

+1

As well as that, what sort of message would it send to the rest of the company if management tried to sweeten the deal for the cabin crew? Straight away they would be resentful, and be wanting improved terms themselves. Then the original agreement, which took months of negotiation, would have to be torn up.

dan_d

++1.
Government needs to look long and hard at what's happpening there, and learn from it. Unions are not the decision makers.

And for the poster way back - I fly frequently, and have done since AL were the only airline in the state. Still loathe Ryanair. Costs nothing to be nice. I've had experience of being sick in an airport and not being let on an AL plane, but being put on the flight the next day for free. That happened in the last 2 years - it's what you pay that bit extra for. Though I still maintain the airlines are almost equal in price nowadays.

zootroid

Just watched a woman from IMPACT on the news on RTE1, she described it as a kick in the face for the cabin crew. She seriously needs a dose of reality. The members were offered a deal that was recommended by the union, and they rejected it. They're getting what they deserve now. Noel Dempsey is calling for more talks, which I can't see happening.

recedite

Idbatterim wrote: »

it would take a German to put things in this bloody country right! Why don't we get Muller in charge of PS reform?!

The unions are calling it a "brutal" decision. I wonder if he put on the jackboots for when he was signing the order.
Seriously though, I'd say he's more brutally honest. The decisions made by cabin crew led inexorably to this result. Mueller merely followed the logic.
Perhaps he does not understand the subtleties of our expectation of obfuscation, U-turns, talks about talks, and ultimately the denial of economic reality.

anneboleyn

cson wrote: »

Pray tell me why they don't deserve to go under? There are plenty of businesses going under in this country at the moment because the outgoings are larger than what's coming in. Now in the real world that's referred to as insolvency; and businesses fold because of it. Now what makes you [and the EI employees by extension] think that Aer Lingus should be any different? Because it shouldn't. It's an inefficient company; it should be allowed go under and I have no doubt it will be replaced. Don't give me ****e about it being symbolic or other such nonsense; it's a business; it's air travel; it ceased to be romantic about 30 odd years ago.

I actually don't think they'll go under. This is first sign of recovery, so long as board sticks to it's guns and holds a hard line . AerLingus has the problem that a) it has a massive cost base, b) it's business model is inefficient compared to Ryanair c) Travelling public expects Ryan Air prices from it, but wants Aer Lingus Service. From what I can see the restructuring plan would have eradicated a) , changed b) and provided c). As the Cabin Crew were too stupid to see that and vote for a future for themselves and the airline, they're being targeted, and rightly so.Aer Lingus needs to hold firm, and if it does, will have a fighting chance to survive. One of the few airlines in the world without debt, although it's cash reserves are dwindling.

vodafoneproblem

I really hope the cabin crew just take their medicine over this one. They were stupid voting against it in the first place with Aer Lingus losing money hand over fist. I suppose no-one ever needed an honours degree to push a trolley down an aisle, and it showed with that vote. I also think they're not as friendly and helpful as they used to be. They wouldn't let me on a flight last year when I was about 3 minutes late using the self-service check in. (I thought it was 40 minutes before that they closed not 45, and I had waited for ages in the DAA red car park for the blooming bus to finally move. Another airline once let me on an international flight with 20 minutes to go! They re-opened it for me and I would have thought AL would do the same when I was only a few minutes late.) I had to buy a whole new ticket for about 7 hours later and missed out on a lovely afternoon on a short holiday. And frequently some of them don't bother with the saying goodbye when you're getting off the plane these days. A small issue, but still annoying. Not quite as shiney in my eyes these days, but I'd still prefer to fly with them than RA.

thebman

vodafoneproblem wrote: »

I really hope the cabin crew just take their medicine over this one. They were stupid voting against it in the first place with Aer Lingus losing money hand over fist. I suppose no-one ever needed an honours degree to push a trolley down an aisle, and it showed with that vote. I also think they're not as friendly and helpful as they used to be. They wouldn't let me on a flight last year when I was about 3 minutes late using the self-service check in. (I thought it was 40 minutes before that they closed not 45, and I had waited for ages in the DAA red car park for the blooming bus to finally move. Another airline once let me on an international flight with 20 minutes to go! They re-opened it for me and I would have thought AL would do the same when I was only a few minutes late.) I had to buy a whole new ticket for about 7 hours later and missed out on a lovely afternoon on a short holiday. And frequently some of them don't bother with the saying goodbye when you're getting off the plane these days. A small issue, but still annoying. Not quite as shiney in my eyes these days, but I'd still prefer to fly with them than RA.

Don't understand that, Ryanair staff always say goodbye to me when I get off their planes.

Seems have the people on here have a problem with Ryanair because they are cheap and they are assuming they are bad without even using the service. I've used them and flown with Aer Lingus, the difference is minimial. I'll go with whoever is cheapest.

vodafoneproblem

I use both but I still prefer AL. Less leg-room on RA flights, plus having to fight for a seat (AL still pre-assign seats) plus the thought in the back of your mind they're looking for an opportunity to rip you off at every turn puts me off RA. There's a sort of air of chaos on their flights that's not there on AL flights. I saw a RA employee checking everyone's bag size in a queue to get on a plane with some cardboard box thing last year. It freaked me out, even though I was way under. Cabin crew can be good and not-so-good in both these days. Ryanair's tend to be prettier and younger. Aer Lingus used to have the 'mothering you' feel, but, as I said, I feel they've lost that a bit. Some are heading towards downright crabby at times. Others remain really nice and 'mothery', though.

A Dub in Glasgo

I have just got back from Dublin using Ryanair costing £16 return all in. Both flights were on time and the plane was clean with the staff polite. I liked flying with Aer Lingus though but Ryanair is always cheaper for me.

On the redundancy issue, I bet some of those cabin crew just wished they could turn back the clock. I wonder will Aer Lingus hold their nerve?

Welease

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I have just got back from Dublin using Ryanair costing £16 return all in. Both flights were on time and the plane was clean with the staff polite. I liked flying with Aer Lingus though but Ryanair is always cheaper for me.

On the redundancy issue, I bet some of those cabin crew just wished they could turn back the clock. I wonder will Aer Lingus hold their nerve?

From the news reports online earlier, it sounds like it's not as drastic as was being made out..

It sounded like they will be made redundant, but most will be offered new contracts on the lower wage, higher working hours and more efficient conditions.. So not sure they really lost out much in the long run anyway.

FlutterinBantam

vodafoneproblem wrote: »

I really hope the cabin crew just take their medicine over this one. They were stupid voting against it in the first place with Aer Lingus losing money hand over fist. I suppose no-one ever needed an honours degree to push a trolley down an aisle, and it showed with that vote. I also think they're not as friendly and helpful as they used to be. They wouldn't let me on a flight last year when I was about 3 minutes late using the self-service check in. (I thought it was 40 minutes before that they closed not 45, and I had waited for ages in the DAA red car park for the blooming bus to finally move. Another airline once let me on an international flight with 20 minutes to go! They re-opened it for me and I would have thought AL would do the same when I was only a few minutes late.) I had to buy a whole new ticket for about 7 hours later and missed out on a lovely afternoon on a short holiday. And frequently some of them don't bother with the saying goodbye when you're getting off the plane these days. A small issue, but still annoying. Not quite as shiney in my eyes these days, but I'd still prefer to fly with them than RA.

You seem to have a bit of an issue about arriving late for flights.

rn

It seams this is a serious twist against the cabin crew
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0311/breaking6.html

Surely its illegal to make someone redundant or terminate their employment just to rehire the exact same positions, but with less pay and worse T&C?

Is it not also illegal to single out one worker for 2 weeks statutory while offering other workers in the same organisation 6 weeks redundancy, irrespective of whether its voluntary or compulsory. I can see reasonable arguements being made for having compulsory reduncancy v's voluntary if certain parts of an organisation were being more curtailed over others and this is the case here. However once termination is implemented it is unfair to treat two employees differently?

BTW I have little sympathy for the Union side - esp since some jobs have to go at aerlingus. I am not a member of a union, but what managment are doing here is exactly the opposite to what they said they were going to do, they are exacting revenge on a certain group of people by not implementing equality or fairness.

Contary to other posts I think management have not managed this well at all. It has been over played. It poses worrying questions for every single person in the state who is an employee. I think what they are doing is illegal and could be forced into an embarrassing U-turn or very expensive compensation claim if pressed ahead and implemented according to that Irishtimes article.

pah

I must admit when I first heard this I was like Holy F#@k that's ballsy

If they see this through all the way it should be held aloft and praised as a national model of how to run a business/Govt.

murphaph

rn wrote: »

BTW I have little sympathy for the Union side - esp since some jobs have to go at aerlingus. I am not a member of a union, but what managment are doing here is exactly the opposite to what they said they were going to do, they are exacting revenge on a certain group of people by not implementing equality or fairness.

I think I'd be pretty annoyed if I was one of the ones in the other operational areas who had accepted the AL proposal only to be treated poorly. The Cabin crew in Mandate gambled...and lost.

I'm not sure of the legalities of what AL are doing, but maybe because they can prove that they are going under that the rules are different? Maybe it's a hangover from the days when AL was a state company (similar to how PS pay can be cut without approval from the employees). In any case, if it means keeping AL afloat and in competition with Ryanair, I'm happy enough. The cabin crew must realise their job is simply not the glamourous one it was in the 60's! It is a service job, like working in a supermarket or restaurant. It should not command inordinately high pay.

rn

I would agree they would have lost if management had just done something like enforces 50 extra compulsory redundancies over x number of voluntary reduncancies. However here they have crossed a contractual, legal line by firing everyone - with no grounds for dismissal. And then readvertising the same positions again. Surely if aer lingus management get away with this it could open the door for other managment teams in business across the country to do it? Which is a frightening thing for all private sector employees in a shrinking job market.

Getting away with this will polarise industrial relations across all sectors and ruin the one thing we do have - that the press would make us believe we don't have - good industrial relations in this country.

Don't forget that many managements in this country are themselves "unionised" through orgainsations like IBEC and ISME.

Nody

rn wrote: »

Surely its illegal to make someone redundant or terminate their employment just to rehire the exact same positions, but with less pay and worse T&C?

Nope because you don't make a person redundant; you make a position redundant. The new job will have a different name on paper and one task added/removed from the list of responsabilities making it a new position. This has been standard work practice in all major companies for quite a while and is perfectly legal.

Is it not also illegal to single out one worker for 2 weeks statutory while offering other workers in the same organisation 6 weeks redundancy, irrespective of whether its voluntary or compulsory. I can see reasonable arguements being made for having compulsory reduncancy v's voluntary if certain parts of an organisation were being more curtailed over others and this is the case here. However once termination is implemented it is unfair to treat two employees differently?

Not really; people usually get the offer for a nice redundancy if they go freely and if there is still surplus headcount they get minimum packages. At least that has been my experience to date though I've obviously not discussed it with a solicitor.

rn

Yes I have heard that before about the position. However its very clear here, regardless of whatever you call the position that its the same role, just longer hours and less pay from what I understand from the papers.

It'll be an interesting one.

Nody

rn wrote: »

Yes I have heard that before about the position. However its very clear here, regardless of whatever you call the position that its the same role, just longer hours and less pay from what I understand from the papers.

I've gone from Supervisor to Manager to People Coach (oh yea, really liked that one :rolleyes:) in the same company with in 3 years and I can assure you that the role was the same but the job description was slightly different every time.

It was specifically done to get rid of certain people and all of us where offered to re-apply for the jobs again, go through the full interview etc. They also had external candidates at the same time I might add; usually 90% of the old staff was hired back, 10% external/absorbed. It was the standard reorganisation method and this was back during the boom years.

FlutterinBantam

Good way of getting rid of the wasters too.

Rebelheart

According to that Joe Duffy Show today, Aer Lingus have reintroduced the fuel surcharge. A quick check on their website and sure enough the fuel surcharge is back.

Was Aer Lingus not forced to abandon the fuel surcharge? What precisely happened on this front?
How can they get away with it when almost every other product we buy has to have the price up front?

Nody

Rebelheart wrote: »

Was Aer Lingus not forced to abandon the fuel surcharge? What precisely happened on this front?
How can they get away with it when almost every other product we buy has to have the price up front?

If they have any flight with out it they can do it ala Ryanair and the Visa Electron/Pre charged Master card set up I guess.

anneboleyn

rn wrote: »

I would agree they would have lost if management had just done something like enforces 50 extra compulsory redundancies over x number of voluntary reduncancies. However here they have crossed a contractual, legal line by firing everyone - with no grounds for dismissal. And then readvertising the same positions again. Surely if aer lingus management get away with this it could open the door for other managment teams in business across the country to do it? Which is a frightening thing for all private sector employees in a shrinking job market.

Getting away with this will polarise industrial relations across all sectors and ruin the one thing we do have - that the press would make us believe we don't have - good industrial relations in this country.

Don't forget that many managements in this country are themselves "unionised" through orgainsations like IBEC and ISME.

It's not illegal, nor crossing any contractual or legal lines, industrial relations lines maybe, but not legal ones. They warned ahead of time that if the deals were rejected a much tough contingency plan existed. Everyone else listened, apart from the cabin crew. And how can you say there are good industrial relations in a country where every 5 minutes someone is shouting "strike" like a Monty Python film, scuppering chances of foreign investment when things start to pick up globally..

Head The Wall

Impact said that despite statements by the CEO of the airline “the measures that have been announced look very much like a form of retribution against cabin crew for voting against the proposals”.

They're full of Einsteins in that place:rolleyes:

Another nugget from the Irish Times piece

Meanwhile, sources suggested last night that a number of cabin crew based in Cork had written to the company last night seeking inclusion in the original cost-saving deal put forward by Aer Lingus.

They had their chance:):)

Dob74

ei.sdraob wrote: »

ah yes ill get the popcorn ready

nothing like sitting back and watching unions tear apart a (previously) good company

to think of it these very same people are trying their best to tear apart the country




what is the punishment for treason in Ireland? these unions (like FF) should be all tried for treason for bringing down good companies and dragging the country into a sewer

To be fair the Union recommended the deal, the membership voted against it.
They must be hoping for a better deal.
It looks like Muller has a pair, so I am sure they will be sorry.

rn

To date we do have relatively excellent IR. Other countries do suffer more "wildcat" strikes than we do.

To be fair to the unions we have not seen any mad wildcat strikes here yet. The only strike action I know that is granted is the PS 3 days of work stoppage and in fairness to them, so far they have only used one and will use the next two because no one will talk to them. Unions are grossly mis-represented in the media in Ireland. I guess threat of strike makes sensational headlines, but there is little backing to those.

However now I fear that will change. And that will damage Irelands reputation. And it the fault lies with Aer Lingus management heavy handling and bad management of the situation and and with IMPACT trade union if it happens.

FlutterinBantam

rn wrote: »

However now I fear that will change. And that will damage Irelands reputation. And it the fault lies with Aer Lingus management heavy handling and bad management of the situation and and with IMPACT trade union if it happens.

Talk about nailing ones colours to the mast!!!

This is typical of the attitude of certain groups in AL.

Everything is the 'fault of management'.

Over more years than I care to remember AL has been dogged by nearly strikes, threats of strikes, impending strikes, promises of strikes and industrial unrest generally rumbling away under the surface .

Generally AL was seen to be a good employer, reasonable pay good conditions,perks and the rest.including job security.
Many people would be extremely pleased to get a job there .

Why in the name of jaysus is there so much unrest and discontent??

Is there a hard core of malcontents stirring it up?
Are the unions used to having the headlines when airport closure in mooted.
Are management so bad that they piss everyone off?

I would suggest there is a silent majority out there allowing the war horses to have far more influence than they deserve and these people are now under threat of job loss.

Now for the first time they seem to have a CEO with a bit of balls and who is not hamstrung by Govt.the game is being played on the concrete.

murphaph

rn wrote: »

To date we do have relatively excellent IR. Other countries do suffer more "wildcat" strikes than we do.

...only because during the Bertie years money was simply thrown at employees to kepe them quiet, and the unions loved it.

rn wrote: »

To be fair to the unions we have not seen any mad wildcat strikes here yet. The only strike action I know that is granted is the PS 3 days of work stoppage and in fairness to them, so far they have only used one and will use the next two because no one will talk to them. Unions are grossly mis-represented in the media in Ireland. I guess threat of strike makes sensational headlines, but there is little backing to those.

Eh? If I see Jack O'Connor or David Begg spouting any more champagne socialist BS I'll puke. They have free reign in the media FFS! RTE especially.

rn wrote: »

However now I fear that will change. And that will damage Irelands reputation. And it the fault lies with Aer Lingus management heavy handling and bad management of the situation and and with IMPACT trade union if it happens.

Agan, Eh? You're blaming everyone except the employees themselves. They are really stupid to have voted against this when it's clear the company is in trouble. The government is broke too and won't be able to help AL. Maybe the trolley dollies were hoping AL management would let them slip under the radar and just change the terms and condidtions of all the other operational area of the company! (not very socialist of them). Herr Müller has called their bluff and is despatching a bit of teutonic efficiency their way. It won't damage Iraland's reputation FFS, that's nonsense. It will HELP it! Did you not notice how Ireland's reputation was improved when cuts were made to PS pay? This is what the international credit markets and investors in ireland want to see...a genuine return to competitive wages! Ireland can and will survive this..if people accept that wages MUST fall (and with it their standard of living if they have wedded themselves to an overpriced house). If you didn't wed yourself to an overpriced house then your standard of living may not fall that much as costs are also freefalling! we are returning to the cost base we should have always had, before we got notions of ourselves without any real basis.

bladeruner

murphaph wrote: »

The cabin crew must realise their job is simply not the glamourous one it was in the 60's! It is a service job, like working in a supermarket or restaurant.

I dont think you grasp the role that cabin crew play in an airline.
They are not there to flog you over priced tea and coffee, they are there to get your fat ass off the aircraft in the event that it has an emergency landing or ditching in the sea or to look after you if you have a heart attack etc

murphaph wrote:

Maybe the trolley dollies were hoping AL management would let them slip under the radar

you really dont seem to have any respect for their job.

They work insane anti-social hours in a pressurised aluminium can at 40,000 feet dealing with every sort of personality and phobia the public can throw at them for up to 12 hours a day while crossing time zones and being jet lagged at the same time.

im not saying they should earn a kings ransom but dont compare it to supermarket work, thats just ignorant.

murphaph

bladeruner wrote: »

I dont think you grasp the role that cabin crew play in an airline.
They are not there to flog you over priced tea and coffee, they are there to get your fat ass off the aircraft in the event that it has an emergency landing or ditching in the sea or to look after you if you have a heart attack etc

99.999% of AL cabin crew will NEVER save anyone from death during a heart attack and will NEVER be on a plane that ditches at sea. Their training may cover it, but it's every man for himself when that sort of stuff happens. In any case, their job is unskilled labour..they just get a basic enough training course in emergency procedures.

bladeruner wrote: »

you really dont seem to have any respect for their job.

It's a job, just a job. I neither respect it nor disrespect it!

bladeruner wrote: »

They work insane anti-social hours in a pressurised aluminium can at 40,000 feet dealing with every sort of personality and phobia the public can throw at them for up to 12 hours a day while crossing time zones and being jet lagged at the same time.

Most of them aren't jet lagged mate cos they fly out of the same base and then return to the same base, ie same time zone. They don't have to adjust to foreign local time all that often (unless on a stopover, rare these days). Mostly the public are actually perfectly ok and quiet. I have never seen anyone kick off on a plane, despite being a regular flyer. A bus driver would have much more hassle day to day.

bladeruner wrote: »

im not saying they should earn a kings ransom but dont compare it to supermarket work, thats just ignorant.

Not really, it's unskilled labour. people in supermarkets need training in HACCP etc. No different.

recedite

bladeruner wrote: »

.

They work insane anti-social hours in a pressurised aluminium can at 40,000 feet dealing with every sort of personality and phobia the public can throw at them for up to 12 hours a day while crossing time zones and being jet lagged at the same time.

According to RTE news the new positions will require more work to be done as well as longer hours...
"However, it will offer immediate re-employment subject to acceptance of a new contract of employment with revised terms and conditions, including pay cuts, longer hours, and more efficient work practices.
It is understood the annual working hours will rise from around 600 to 850."
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0310/aerlingus.html

However that's still only 71 days work each year, if working those insane 12 hour shifts.