Aerlingus Cabin Crew want the best of both worlds

cabincrew

Corsendonk wrote: »

I honestly think your losing support for Aer Lingus cabin crew by your recent posts here. You seem to want to pick and choose Labour Law while wrapping yourself up in the Irish flag.

if you bother to actually read what im writing i make no reference to who should get the job over who,i think it should be equal to everyone.THAT IS NOT WHAT WILL HAPPEN.

KerranJast

cabincrew wrote: »

I am also a shareholder,along with a lot of other employees at EI,we cant be sacked.on what grounds? we are working to our contract of employment...and i wont be bullied into accepting the joke of a contract they just drafted up. NEVER

You won't be sacked. You're job will be made redundant and a new position will be filled from new hires. It's standard practice in private sector restructuring where long service staff refuse to accept new conditions.

It's very hard to prove unfair dismissal in this case as the company will be able to show they made ample effort to agree the new contracts and will probably cover their ass legally by making the new position slightly different to the ones they made redundant.

I really hope this doesn't happen as I don't like seeing anyone laid off but tbh if the cabin crew continue to damage the long term viability of the airline and by extension the jobs of all the other EI employees then I can't see an alternative way out.

cabincrew

pocketvenus wrote: »

Excuse me I am not being silly you were banging on about US and other EU carriers being below EU excellence stds. All I was pointing out was that AL was not free from incidents either. Some of these airlines ahve not had incidents for years. If I am correct Jet Blue would currently hold the best saftey record in the airline industry.

Also it has to be taken into consideration that some of the US and other incidents are due to terrorism which have to be taken out due to AL being Irish and we are usually free from this sort of attack thankfully.

So excluding terrorist incidients on other major int incidents they would have excellent safety records comparible with AL.

no they dont..eg AA 7fatal excluding the terrorist attack.

OutlawPete

Rented Mule wrote: »

Thanks for adding your two cents worth.

You're very welcome.

pocketvenus

cabincrew wrote: »

if you bother to actually read what im writing i make no reference to who should get the job over who,i think it should be equal to everyone.THAT IS NOT WHAT WILL HAPPEN.

Ok so what do we have levelled against the company now

Sexual Discrimination / Female Discrimination
Family Discrimination
Breach of Data Protection
Racial Discriminationn - as in according to you they won't hire Irish staff.

My guess, by end of week this list will have doubled.

pocketvenus

cabincrew wrote: »

no they dont..eg AA 7fatal excluding the terrorist attack.

Right leave AA out of it.

Still there are many other airlines out there with same safety record as AL so accept it ok.

Anyway it bears no difference to the current discussuion so lets just drop it.

Skadoosh

cabincrew wrote: »

maybe your dad has no support for us and thats his own buisness,perhaps its because he got this 30 grand to leave and come back on a new contract...the ground staff had a choice,take 30 grand to start a new contract..of course they are not moaning...look what they got!!! i have really close friends on the ground at ei who fully support us so dont speak for the lot of them..some by the way who have admitted that since they got the new contracts they earn more than they ever did as they can do so much overtime now.however im not bitter in anyway to them..they deserved it as they work really hard.

My DH, not my dad. DH is internet-speak for husband.

The ground staff gave up a lot many years before the redundancy was even mooted, and a lot of them were giving long before you ever started in the airline. Does the Cahill plan ring any bells?

If your "really close friends on the ground" genuinely support you and aren't just saying so to your face, why aren't they, as another poster said, refusing to deal with the hired-in planes? Could it be because everybody else knows cabin crew's position is crazy?

I don't know anyone who is earning more than they did before. They don't get shift pay for one thing. And there's an overtime ban at the moment, how come you don't know that?

Ground staff aren't getting their breaks at the moment because they're trying to solve the disruption caused by cabin crew working to rule about their breaks. Go figure.

cabincrew wrote: »

How is that relevant??? what they gave pay cuts??? are you serious??? since i joined every year ive taken wage cuts.so what are you talking about? since when are we moaning about taking wage cuts???

WAGE CUTS ARE NOT THE ISSUE HERE!!!! A WORK/LIFE BALANCE IS.

YES MY JOB IS SO IMPORTANT TO ME,BUT SO IS MY PERSONAL LIFE.

It's relevant because somebody asked about migration and the ground staff taking a hit but getting money for migration. I was explaining that the cuts were happening for years long before the redundancy was ever considered.

And please stop shouting at people.

cabincrew wrote: »

yep they got 30grand and as for the 3am shifts thats the nature of the job...its a 24hour operation.my friend who works on the ground says they can swap no probs with each other etc..like my friend will so her early shift then a friends late shift th get a certain day off.etc etc.

If a 3.00 a.m. shift is the nature of the job for ground staff, why are cabin crew complaining about 5.00 a.m. starts? What's good for the goose ...

And your friend is wrong or you're deliberately misleading people, if you're suggesting that ground staff can work an early shift, followed by a late shift, to get an extra day off. Working Time Act anybody?

Cabin crew can do swaps as well according to another post on this board by a cabin crew member.

cabincrew wrote: »

we are realistic about our expectations,we have even more than any other department in the last 5years...they keep coming back at us..not because we are cabincrew its because our department is mostly female and they think we are weak.well enough is enough,if they win then i will leave because it would be impossible to have a work/life balance.but im not going without a fight ,i love my job,im lucky to have a job but im afraid slave labour was abolished many years ago.

You have absolutely not given more than other departments and this blinkered head-in-the-sand attitude is exactly what is causing this problem. You've said you're AI staff for what, 5 years? And in the last 5 years they "keep coming back at us". You, and every other staff member, and not for 5 years, for the 20+ years my husband has been working there. All other staff have been hit harder than cabin crew and pilots historically. You mightn't want to accept that, but it doesn't make it untrue. For someone who is spouting about industrial relations at Aer Lingus you're spectacularly ill-informed. Maybe you should stop listening to Impact.

mandy30

pocketvenus wrote: »

kate74 wrote: »

How rude and ignorant.

I think mandy actually speaks alot of sense and she is not the first AL CC talking this way.

Believe me the experience I had was recent enough on a long haul flight and from hearing conversations and talking at baggage collection with other passangers it seems majority of the plane were not impressed with the soem of the CC.

Thank you.

The people on here who slate me cannot see that I am not bitter and twisted.

I am merely pissed off that the same things are going on year on year.

I have striked with them. And on the other side I have been affected by the strikes as a customer. So the angle I am coming at is someone who has seen how it operates on the inside and is very frustrated about it as it is over sheer stubbornness.

Anything I have said about that place is based on the facts when I worked there.

I am not cranky or moody thank you.
I am just disgusted that the state the country is in and these staff are whinging about lunch breaks. It makes me sick to my stomach.

My reasons for leaving are no ones business, the thank god I did. The airline is going down the tubes fast, and down in peoples opinion even faster.

barrackali

cabincrew wrote: »

I am also a shareholder,along with a lot of other employees at EI,we cant be sacked.on what grounds? we are working to our contract of employment...and i wont be bullied into accepting the joke of a contract they just drafted up. NEVER

I repeat....you are not a public sector worker anymore, you work for a private sector company that is free to decide that your "job title" is no longer required...this has been standard practice in the private sector for yonks.

cabincrew

KerranJast wrote: »

You won't be sacked. You're job will be made redundant and a new position will be filled from new hires. It's standard practice in private sector restructuring where long service staff refuse to accept new conditions.

It's very hard to prove unfair dismissal in this case as the company will be able to show they made ample effort to agree the new contracts and will probably cover their ass legally by making the new position slightly different to the ones they made redundant.

I really hope this doesn't happen as I don't like seeing anyone laid off but tbh if the cabin crew continue to damage the long term viability of the airline and by extension the jobs of all the other EI employees then I can't see an alternative way out.

If you actually knew what you were talking about u,d know that u cant make anyone reduntant then advertise for their position.please. in fact you cant advertise the position for 6months.

Skadoosh

cabincrew wrote: »

If you actually knew what you were talking about u,d know that u cant make anyone reduntant then advertise for their position.please. in fact you cant advertise the position for 6months.

You can fire people for refusing to work to the terms of their contract, as per the agreement which cabin crew signed up to, and then hire new people. You're very foolish if you think the company is going to give in.

barrackali

cabincrew wrote: »

If you actually knew what you were talking about u,d know that u cant make anyone reduntant then advertise for their position.please. in fact you cant advertise the position for 6months.

I don't think you are reading the posts on here, they would be advertising "another position"

FlutterinBantam

cabincrew wrote: »

no they dont..eg AA 7fatal excluding the terrorist attack.

Cabincrew... word in your ear.


You are making a total hash of the arguments which you obviously believe in.

You are doing neither yourself or your colleagues any favours at all .

Most posters here would deem that your attitude of raw intransigence and long

diatribes against what you perceive as bad management as the reason EI is

in the situation they are in.


That's just my opinion ,you can ignore it, or take heed, but your contributions

here do nothing to endear the Cabin Crew position to those not in the know

in these situations.

pocketvenus

barrackali wrote: »

I don't think you are reading the posts on here, they would be advertising "another position"

cabincrew is shouting and posting first and reading later.

You are right, by refusing to work to the t&c which they accepted you can be fired.

KerranJast

cabincrew wrote: »

If you actually knew what you were talking about u,d know that u cant make anyone reduntant then advertise for their position.please. in fact you cant advertise the position for 6months.

I quite clearly said the company would legally cover themselves by advertising a slightly different position.

cabincrew

Skadoosh wrote: »

My DH, not my dad. DH is internet-speak for husband.

The ground staff gave up a lot many years before the redundancy was even mooted, and a lot of them were giving long before you ever started in the airline. Does the Cahill plan ring any bells?

If your "really close friends on the ground" genuinely support you and aren't just saying so to your face, why aren't they, as another poster said, refusing to deal with the hired-in planes? Could it be because everybody else knows cabin crew's position is crazy?

I don't know anyone who is earning more than they did before. They don't get shift pay for one thing. And there's an overtime ban at the moment, how come you don't know that?

Ground staff aren't getting their breaks at the moment because they're trying to solve the disruption caused by cabin crew working to rule about their breaks. Go figure.



It's relevant because somebody asked about migration and the ground staff taking a hit but getting money for migration. I was explaining that the cuts were happening for years long before the redundancy was ever considered.

And please stop shouting at people.



If a 3.00 a.m. shift is the nature of the job for ground staff, why are cabin crew complaining about 5.00 a.m. starts? What's good for the goose ...

And your friend is wrong or you're deliberately misleading people, if you're suggesting that ground staff can work an early shift, followed by a late shift, to get an extra day off. Working Time Act anybody?

Cabin crew can do swaps as well according to another post on this board by a cabin crew member.



You have absolutely not given more than other departments and this blinkered head-in-the-sand attitude is exactly what is causing this problem. You've said you're AI staff for what, 5 years? And in the last 5 years they "keep coming back at us". You, and every other staff member, and not for 5 years, for the 20+ years my husband has been working there. All other staff have been hit harder than cabin crew and pilots historically. You mightn't want to accept that, but it doesn't make it untrue. For someone who is spouting about industrial relations at Aer Lingus you're spectacularly ill-informed. Maybe you should stop listening to Impact.

I am not shouting at anyone,i cant see,i need glasses.

Everyone at EI has taking cuts yes,but not with an extra 30grand in their pocket,how is that such a bad deal.my friend has on plenty of occasions been on an early 5-1 then started back at 8pm for the next shift.why would she lie about that,finally, we never moaned about 5am starts,sure we,ve always done them.

As for your husband not getting a break,thats not going to be a daly event.

cabincrew

KerranJast wrote: »

I quite clearly said the company would legally cover themselves by advertising a slightly different position.

Such as?

FlutterinBantam

cabincrew wrote: »

I am not shouting at anyone,i cant see,i need glasses.

Everyone at EI has taking cuts yes,but not with an extra 30grand in their pocket,how is that such a bad deal.my friend has on plenty of occasions been on an early 5-1 then started back at 8pm for the next shift.why would she lie about that,finally, we never moaned about 5am starts,sure we,ve always done them.

As for your husband not getting a break,thats not going to be a daly event.

Stop digging pal.

pocketvenus

cabincrew wrote: »

I am not shouting at anyone,i cant see,i need glasses.

I hope you have a pair as last thing we need is a cabin crew member who cannot see working and trying to operate emergency exits / exits.

If not please book an eye test as if you really cannot see as you claim well you should not be working in the air

Skadoosh

cabincrew wrote: »

I am not shouting at anyone,i cant see,i need glasses.

Everyone at EI has taking cuts yes,but not with an extra 30grand in their pocket,how is that such a bad deal.my friend has on plenty of occasions been on an early 5-1 then started back at 8pm for the next shift.why would she lie about that,finally, we never moaned about 5am starts,sure we,ve always done them.

As for your husband not getting a break,thats not going to be a daly event.

Actually my husband gets a 15 minute break, not an hour as you mentioned earlier. Do you think people working trying to reroute passengers during the snow or volcano took breaks? It's a regular occurrence, and you're being misleading suggesting you won't get a break. You are getting breaks but you've to take them on the plane and stagger them. Not the same thing as "working 11 hours without a break" at all.

I have a cabin crew friend who does moan about 5 a.m. starts. Of course she's there a lot longer than you. :rolleyes:

And can I reiterate, for the past 20 odd years staff have taken cuts without getting a pay-off. They have lost annual leave days, lieu days for bank holidays, shift pay, overtime pay, pay freezes, changes in work practices, reduction of breaks, and so on and have done all of this while cabin crew refused to make any but the most basic of concessions. Finally they got a payout in return for a 40% pay cut. 40% - not at all comparable with whatever you're suggesting you've taken. That's on top of all the other concessions they've given over the years before that.

And perhaps you should ask your union why the offer of migration wasn't passed on to Impact members as well as Siptu, because my understanding is that it was a union decision not to pass it on, so there's not much point in you bitching about it now. And would you take it, for a 40% pay cut? That's barely a couple of years difference in pay for what they got, but they took it because of the very legitimate fear that if they didn't take it, they could all end up out of work in the next year or two anyway thanks to the intransigence of cabin crew.

cabincrew

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Cabincrew... word in your ear.


You are making a total hash of the arguments which you obviously believe in.

You are doing neither yourself or your colleagues any favours at all .

Most posters here would deem that your attitude of raw intransigence and long

diatribes against what you perceive as bad management as the reason EI is

in the situation they are in.


That's just my opinion ,you can ignore it, or take heed, but your contributions

here do nothing to endear the Cabin Crew position to those not in the know

in these situations.

Your probably right,but facts are facts,i think this is a matter for EI and impact and the labour court.

Skadoosh

cabincrew wrote: »

Your probably right,but facts are facts,i think this is a matter for EI and impact and the labour court.

What good will that be? You've already been through the process and now you're reneging on it. Why on earth would EI negotiate with Impact again and waste time coming to an agreement which Impact may or may not choose to honour?

barrackali

Skadoosh wrote: »

What good will that be? You've already been through the process and now you're reneging on it. Why on earth would EI negotiate with Impact again and waste time coming to an agreement which Impact may or may not choose to honour?

I totally agree, why the hell would EI want to go down that road again? EI and your militant representatives (Impact) made a deal with EI, now your union decides they don't like it. I'm sorry but you people are heading for a very long dole queue.

NinjaTruncs

cabincrew wrote: »

If you actually knew what you were talking about u,d know that u cant make anyone reduntant then advertise for their position.please. in fact you cant advertise the position for 6months.

So how did Aer Lingus get away with this http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1007/aerlingus.html

chalkitdown

A lot of the posters in this thread supporting the Aer Lingus management position are the usual right wing nut jobs. The type of people that have this country in the toilet.

I fully support the cabin crew in this, if only because of the bullying approach which is being taken by Herr Mueller.

For those of you that have compared American pay scales and work practises with EI workers rates, you should know that some pilots, nevermind cabin crew, have to work second jobs because it's so bad over there.

Wait until you get subjected to the same sort of opportunistic bullying by management in this race to the bottom, I'm sure you'll squeal the loudest of all.

FlutterinBantam

chalkitdown wrote: »

A lot of the posters in this thread supporting the Aer Lingus management position are the usual right wing nut jobs. The type of people that have this country in the toilet.

I fully support the cabin crew in this, if only because of the bullying approach which is being taken by Herr Mueller.

For those of you that have compared American pay scales and work practises with EI workers rates, you should know that some pilots, nevermind cabin crew, have to work second jobs because it's so bad over there.

Wait until you get subjected to the same sort of opportunistic bullying by management in this race to the bottom, I'm sure you'll squeal the loudest of all.

What is this bullying approach you speak of friend?


bear in mind that 15 months of negotiations have already passed and 93% agreement received.

What bullying?

chalkitdown

I'm definitely not your friend. The fact that you don't perceive it as bullying says enough about you.

FlutterinBantam

chalkitdown wrote: »

I'm definitely not your friend. The fact that you don't perceive it as bullying says enough about you.

Ok... what is this bullying you speak of?

chalkitdown

Aer Lingus management are applying a new rostering arrangement that had not been previously agreed by the workers affected. The manner of implementation is over the top and is IMO bullying.

FlutterinBantam

chalkitdown wrote: »

Aer Lingus management are applying a new rostering arrangement that had not been previously agreed by the workers affected. The manner of implementation is over the top and is IMO bullying.

Management would not agree with that reasoning.

Skadoosh

chalkitdown wrote: »

A lot of the posters in this thread supporting the Aer Lingus management position are the usual right wing nut jobs. The type of people that have this country in the toilet.

I fully support the cabin crew in this, if only because of the bullying approach which is being taken by Herr Mueller.

For those of you that have compared American pay scales and work practises with EI workers rates, you should know that some pilots, nevermind cabin crew, have to work second jobs because it's so bad over there.

Wait until you get subjected to the same sort of opportunistic bullying by management in this race to the bottom, I'm sure you'll squeal the loudest of all.

If you're writing off a lot of those who agree with the company's stance as "right wing nut jobs", what do you call people like myself or my husband (a Siptu member by the way)? It's easy to call names, harder to present a cogent argument.

And ground staff have been subjected to the "same sort of opportunistic bullying" (i.e., the company's insistence on changes in work practices which the staff aren't happy with). They've conceded, to keep the company afloat. Cabin crew seem to think they should receive protection from changes to work practices, and will be happy enough to bring the entire company down with them.

pocketvenus

chalkitdown wrote: »

A lot of the posters in this thread supporting the Aer Lingus management position are the usual right wing nut jobs. The type of people that have this country in the toilet.

I fully support the cabin crew in this, if only because of the bullying approach which is being taken by Herr Mueller.

For those of you that have compared American pay scales and work practises with EI workers rates, you should know that some pilots, nevermind cabin crew, have to work second jobs because it's so bad over there.

Wait until you get subjected to the same sort of opportunistic bullying by management in this race to the bottom, I'm sure you'll squeal the loudest of all.

The type of people who have this country in the toilet as you so equolently put it are the likes of the EI CC.

People who refuse to accept that we live in changing economic times where companies need to change with the times and kept cost effective. For years EI was a bloated Gov owned operation and where did that get them in the end no place. They could not compete due to high costs and operating system.

So to try to save the company and workers from the dole, where alot of them would stay considering the airline industry is already in a bad place, they streamlined, cut out deadwood and tried to operated as per most other airlines.

In order to save my job I took a €4k paycut, work 1 hour longer per day- that is 1/2 shorter lunch and 1/2 longer in evening. None of my colleagues or I kicked up a fuss, we prefer to stay in employment even though it was a change in our contracts which we had not previously agreed to.!!!

macbrada

cabincrew wrote: »

I really cant answer that for you im sorry. both sides are not backing down.we have had enough..maybe when the company cop on and go to the labour court.Hopefully soon.

This dispute will end when the following simple cornerstone of business is understood by both sides.. It applies to all industries worldwide......

Sell your service/product....
Pay the costs of providing the service/product.
The difference is profit to supply service or product tomorrow.
No profit = stop selling and close business.
Learn mistakes from above and start again..

When will it end you ask?

Irish working people unionised or not, directors or entry level staff need to re educate themselves to jointly survive this painful downturn....


Management/owners and operational staff need to work together. A common theme is that staff must beat management! Wow, the cliche cutting off ones nose to spite ones face rings true here...

Again, business 101 taught worldwide...

Management identify certain needs to keep selling product / service tomorrow.
Any worker from director to bottom level stops this....company closes.

Cc....times are hard..pick your battles. This can only result in job losses.
Take the high road and accept changing times, and feed your families tomorrow



Unions advising people to beat management translates directly to

" Stand firm with your pride intact as you sack yourself"

chalkitdown

Skadoosh wrote: »

If you're writing off a lot of those who agree with the company's stance as "right wing nut jobs", what do you call people like myself or my husband (a Siptu member by the way)? It's easy to call names, harder to present a cogent argument.

And ground staff have been subjected to the "same sort of opportunistic bullying" (i.e., the company's insistence on changes in work practices which the staff aren't happy with). They've conceded, to keep the company afloat. Cabin crew seem to think they should receive protection from changes to work practices, and will be happy enough to bring the entire company down with them.

Cabin crew have already agreed to changes in work practices, it's the imposition of new work practices that have not been agreed by anyone that are the problem.
I presume your husband agreed to the changes made to his job?

cabincrew

We have had plenty of cost cuts in the last couple of years,we understand that we had to do our part to save the company money,we accepted that and in 2009 cabincrew alone saved the company 38m,they wanted to increase our produtivity,2010 we increases it by 13percent dispite volcanic ask etc.

They wanted to increase our flying hours to 850 a year,we ageed to that also

Binding arbitration found a way to deliver the 850 hours,they also said that any other changes to our contracts must be ageed by us first .

we work 1716 duty hours ayear not just 850 that some people seem to think,the 850 is time spent in the air.

so the company need to increase our productivity..how does the right to request one weekend off every 8 weeks get in the way of productivity?

we are working more hours with less pay just like everyone else,thats not the issue here.its all the other stuff they are doing (without agreement)we have the issue with.

chalkitdown

macbrada wrote: »

This dispute will end when the following simple cornerstone of business is understood by both sides.. It applies to all industries worldwide......

Sell your service/product....
Pay the costs of providing the service/product.
The difference is profit to supply service or product tomorrow.
No profit = stop selling and close business.
Learn mistakes from above and start again..

When will it end you ask?

Irish working people unionised or not, directors or entry level staff need to re educate themselves to jointly survive this painful downturn....


Management/owners and operational staff need to work together. A common theme is that staff must beat management! Wow, the cliche cutting off ones nose to spite ones face rings true here...

Again, business 101 taught worldwide...

Management identify certain needs to keep selling product / service tomorrow.
Any worker from director to bottom level stops this....company closes.

Cc....times are hard..pick your battles. This can only result in job losses.
Take the high road and accept changing times, and feed your families tomorrow



Unions advising people to beat management translates directly to

" Stand firm with your pride intact as you sack yourself"

I have no problem with companies restructuring employment practices to remain competitive, but I believe it should be by agreement not the over the top heavy handed imposition which is being used here.

kevinmcc

cabincrew wrote: »

we work 1716 duty hours ayear not just 850 that some people seem to think,the 850 is time spent in the air.

Wow you work 33 hours a week then if that's the case, how do you manage that? That's an awful lot of hours to be working on average per week :rolleyes:

So cabincrew, tell us, exactly how much do you currently earn at Aer Lingus?
Also how many holiday days are you entitled to per year? Does it increase after a certain length of service?

Skadoosh

chalkitdown wrote: »

Cabin crew have already agreed to changes in work practices, it's the imposition of new work practices that have not been agreed by anyone that are the problem.
I presume your husband agreed to the changes made to his job?

He agreed in principle to changes. He wasn't handed specific details of, for example, new rosters. The new rosters he works are extremely onerous. Ground crew just get on with it. Do you really think that EI should have shown you some draft rosters before you voted? Because they don't do that for anyone else.

chalkitdown

Skadoosh wrote: »

He agreed in principle to changes. He wasn't handed specific details of, for example, new rosters. The new rosters he works are extremely onerous. Ground crew just get on with it. Do you really think that EI should have shown you some draft rosters before you voted? Because they don't do that for anyone else.

I am not involved with the airline industry, but yes I would expect any changes that I am asked to accept to be outlined to me first. I would consider that to be common decency.

pocketvenus

chalkitdown wrote: »

I am not involved with the airline industry, but yes I would expect any changes that I am asked to accept to be outlined to me first. I would consider that to be common decency.

If that was way nothing would change and the whole economic system would collapse. Nobody wants to work harder and a bit longer for less money given the choice. EI CC are not being subjected to slave labour. I f they want to know the real meaning of bad t&c I would try a sweat shop in India, or may China where I hear some working condtions are just great.

Theory and practice are two very different things.

As I said where I work we had our annual review were told this was happening and that was it if we wanted to work and keep the company open.

chalkitdown

pocketvenus wrote: »

If that was way nothing would change and the whole economic system would collapse. Nobody wants to work harder and a bit longer for less money.

Theory and practice are two very different things.

As I said where I work we had our annual review were told this was happening and that was it if we wanted to work and keep the company open.

And when it happens again next year and again the year after that, like has happened with Aer Lingus I wonder will you be so happy? I don't think so.

kate74

kevinmcc wrote: »

Wow you work 33 hours a week then if that's the case, how do you manage that? That's an awful lot of hours to be working on average per week :rolleyes:

So cabincrew, tell us, exactly how much do you currently earn at Aer Lingus?
Also how many holiday days are you entitled to per year? Does it increase after a certain length of service?

Well done for dividing that by 52 weeks but I'm sure the cabin crew get some holidays as well which would increase those hours. The crew can be scheduled 60 hours in 7 day period

Prisoner6409

Aer Lingus Management do not give a sh1t about their paying customers(you and me). There is a race to the bottom going on in this country between our 2 majoe airlines, AL and RA and Ryan Air have a head start. This is all about cost cutting and getting ppl to do more work for the same or less money.

AfterDusk

kate74 wrote: »

Well done for dividing that by 52 weeks but I'm sure the cabin crew get some holidays as well which would increase those hours. The crew can be scheduled 60 hours in 7 day period

So then, by your calculations they work 28 weeks? :rolleyes:

macbrada

chalkitdown wrote: »

I have no problem with companies restructuring employment practices to remain competitive, but I believe it should be by agreement not the over the top heavy handed imposition which is being used here.

Wow thanks for proving my point.......must the management or in this case the accountant explain that more is being spent than taken in to every employee in detail....the company is suffering a major stroke/heart attck to use a medical metaphor.....

Should the accountant having a heart attack inflight ask the air steward to explain in detail why they need the defibrillator used...or in reality think....my god things ain't right here...I trust your expertise in this area!!!!!!!

pocketvenus

chalkitdown wrote: »

And when it happens again next year and again the year after that, like has happened with Aer Lingus I wonder will you be so happy? I don't think so.

The reason it has had to happen for a few years in Aer Lingus shows you how much wastage there was in the company. As I said like other Gov agencies wages were too high to begin with way above rest of the industry, outdated practices etc. Same tale in BA.

This kind on hyperbole of EI CC being cut year after year till they are working for nothing is just ott

If I have to work a bit longer next year so be it I much prefer to be in employment.

chalkitdown

macbrada wrote: »

Wow thanks for proving my point.......must the management or in this case the accountant explain that more is being spent than taken in to every employee in detail....the company is suffering a major stroke/heart attck to use a medical metaphor.....

Should the accountant having a heart attack inflight ask the air steward to explain in detail why they need the defibrillator used...or in reality think....my god things ain't right here...I trust your expertise in this area!!!!!!!

I'd like to respond, but I haven't a bleedin' clue what you are trying to say.

kevinmcc

Wow I've just realised that Aer Lingus Cabin Crew get around 35 days annual leave :eek:

kate74

neil2304 wrote: »

So then, by your calculations they work 28 weeks? :rolleyes:

I didn't say they work 60 hours every 7 days but that's what they can frequently work so saying they do just 33 hours a week is complete rubbish.

Taceom

I haven't read all the posts here but I do agree with the OP. Fed up now with the carry on of Aerlingus Cabin Crew. Have no sympathy on them at all. They have a job so get on with it and be glad of the job while so many of their passengers have not.
Many families have had to put up with changes to their family life etc. and have had to deal with it quietly and not hold the public to ransom like the cabincrew.
If you're not happy with the conditions, get out of the job, there are many who would willingly have your jobs.