Aer Lingus Strike

aircobra19 said:
Pilots can't be trained overnight and not just anyone can be a pilot. You also can't just move a pilot from one aircraft type to another over night. So its like a resource that has to be carefully managed as you can't increase supply instantly on demand. Since you can't operate an airline without pilots its resource you can't do without. (Not yet any way). Its also an expensive resource to train and maintain. So basically pilots are a critical resource for an airline.
Click to expand...

Especially when they block companies attempts to hire new ones. Why should exisiting workers dictate what new employees are paid? I don't tell my company what new colleagues should be paid and I work in a specialised professional role. The labour court and Flynn report clearly said that Aer Lingus were allowed to open bases outside Dublin and hire on local pay and conditions. Why didn't the pilots start throwing their toys out of their prams then?? The pilots in Belfast are going to be paid the same if not more than Dublin based pilots. Even the Union accept this. The problem is the pension scheme. The company don't want them to have access to a defined benefit scheme. Welcome to the real world. The existing pilots should thank their lucky stars that they have a defined benefit scheme and allow new prospective pilots decide for themselves if they are happy with the terms and conditions offered
 
I'm sick of this protectionist nonsense. If Belfast pilots want to work for different pay and benefits then that's entirely their choice. Let the market decide their wage packet. If they can't hire people for the package they're offering then they'll have to increase it. If not, then that's the true value of the Belfast pilot's work. Welcome to the private sector Aer Lingus employees!
 
You saying everyone for themselves. Taken to its conclusion some people would work for free with no benefits to get the experience. Some will even pay to do it. Which is why people pay 80-100k to get qualified as a CPL and type rated to be a commercial pilot.

You're arguing for a lower pay and conditions and no job security.
 
In the private sector there's no such thing as job security! I'm only arguing for lower pay if that's what the market decides. And if it does, then so be it! Just goes to show how overpaid some people in the public sector can be.
 
aircobra19 said:
You saying everyone for themselves. Taken to its conclusion some people would work for free with no benefits to get the experience. Some will even pay to do it. Which is why people pay 80-100k to get qualified as a CPL and type rated to be a commercial pilot.

You're arguing for a lower pay and conditions and no job security.
Click to expand...

It's a free market. If people want to pay to get experience then best of luck to them...nobody's forcing them. Trainee accountants and solicitors earn pittance with no guarantee of earnings when they qualify so why should it be different for pilots?
 
In case you havent noticed it's 2007, factories are now running on more and more automated systems, lower end jobs are becoming extinct. You have to educate yourself, and step up to the mark for a job these days, nothing is handed to you anymore.

The unions are just there to protect their own interests. Let's be honest here, if a lot of the workforce currently in union controlled jobs were to get in line for private sector, modern day company jobs, they would have a snowballs chance of getting it.

This 'tantrum-like' actions to 'changes' not erosions in how people are expected to fuction in their job has had it's day. You need to grow as an employee, as a person, learn new skills, instead of being afraid of them, basically have a drive to better your self both personally and professionally.
Otherwise, you will be left behind. And where will the unions be for you then!
 
So you'll all be happy knowing that surgeon or pilot, looking after you and yours, is working long shifts, tired and stressed because of the working conditions and is worried about their job security and instead of taking a day, off decided to come in and work. Obviously the consequences of making a mistake are exactly the same as working on a production line or working as a trainee accountant or solicitor.
 
aircobra19 said:
So you'll all be happy knowing that surgeon or pilot, looking after you and yours, is working long shifts, tired and stressed because of the working conditions and is worried about their job security and instead of taking a day, off decided to come in and work. Obviously the consequences of making a mistake are exactly the same as working on a production line or working as a trainee accountant or solicitor.
Click to expand...

Well if you have to resort to that argument, you must be getting desperate. It is thrown out by all these professions to scare people. I don't remember Aer Lingus saying they expected the Belfast pilots to fly longer than their Dublin colleagues and put lives in jeopardy. Why would any company encourage people to risk an accident by over working and seriously damage if not destroy the business??
 
The majority of employees are not in the danger that people make out. If you do your job well, give respect to your employer and decide to work for a company that has a good track record, then there is nothing to worry about.

And if down the line, the company for whatever reason hits hard times and have to let people go, especially if they are traded on the stock market, it's hardly personal and would not be down to the company trying to 'screw' it's employees, the employees after all make the company profitable and hence rise the share price and hence allow them to increase wages etc.
 
aircobra19 said:
You saying everyone for themselves. Taken to its conclusion some people would work for free with no benefits to get the experience. Some will even pay to do it. Which is why people pay 80-100k to get qualified as a CPL and type rated to be a commercial pilot.

You're arguing for a lower pay and conditions and no job security.
Click to expand...

There is also risk / reward here. You may pay 80 - 100 K for training, but that's no guarantee of a job in your preferred location, at your preferred salary level.

Remember the taxi drivers who paid 80K for a plate and car, before deregulation meant that anyone could buy a plate for 5K.

Market conditions can and do change.
 
Sunny said:
seriously damage if not destroy the business??
Click to expand...

Totally, this is the crux of the matter. Once Aer Lingus went public, company profits must come first. It is in everyones best interests to work on improving those profits. It is also up to management to ensure that the employees benefit from good times as well as he company. And as far as I can see, changes Aer Lingus have proposed before this Shannon/Pilot debacle, were not in any way 'eroding' of their workers rights.
 
Sunny said:
Well if you have to resort to that argument, you must be getting desperate. It is thrown out by all these professions to scare people. I don't remember Aer Lingus saying they expected the Belfast pilots to fly longer than their Dublin colleagues and put lives in jeopardy. Why would any company encourage people to risk an accident by over working and seriously damage if not destroy the business??
Click to expand...

Deperate is comparing flying a 10-80 tons or more at 400mph, an asset worth millions, and being responsible for hundreds of people with working on a production line in a factory etc. Its non uncommon for a company to sacrifice the long term for short term gains. Especially if theres poor management with poor vision.

Moving their bases out of Ireland, and only concentrating on the higher profit routes will move jobs out of ireland, and mean few or no-one operates on regional routes. But then once you privatise a company you lose the ability to use it to support regional or national development. Same thing as Eircom.
 
sinbadsailor said:
Totally, this is the crux of the matter. Once Aer Lingus went public, company profits must come first. It is in everyones best interests to work on improving those profits. It is also up to management to ensure that the employees benefit from good times as well as he company. And as far as I can see, changes Aer Lingus have proposed before this Shannon/Pilot debacle, were not in any way 'eroding' of their workers rights.
Click to expand...

Workers rights?
 
aircobra19 said:
Deperate is comparing flying a 10-80 tons or more at 400mph, an asset worth millions, and being responsible for hundreds of people with working on a production line in a factory etc. Its non uncommon for a company to sacrifice the long term for short term gains. Especially if theres poor management with poor vision.
.
Click to expand...

Who is comparing the two jobs? Do you have any evidence that Aer Lingus is encouraring or coercing its pilots to carry out unsafe work practices? This dispute is not about dangerous work practices. If it was, I would be the first to support them. It is about money plain and simple. And to try and drag safety issues into it when even the unions themselves have never claimed that hiring pilots in Belfast will lead to safety issues is bizzare and misleading.
 
aircobra19 said:
Workers rights?
Click to expand...

What about them, It's implicit in my post, or I thought it was, that your employer is covering your workers rights. It is not a workers right to strike if something changes in their daily working life, you adapt, continue on with your job, and as long as you are still treated properly under employment law, there is no problem.

The business landscape changes, the marketplace changes, hence movements in share price. You need to be flexible in how you approach your work, be willing to change. You job will at some stage become redundant, you cannot stop this.

Workers rights is just thrown out there to protect a cushie number, with loads of holidays and pay that is above and beyond what your job responsibility commands.
 
Sunny said:
Who is comparing the two jobs? Do you have any evidence that Aer Lingus is encouraring or coercing its pilots to carry out unsafe work practices? This dispute is not about dangerous work practices. If it was, I would be the first to support them. It is about money plain and simple. And to try and drag safety issues into it when even the unions themselves have never claimed that hiring pilots in Belfast will lead to safety issues is bizzare and misleading.
Click to expand...

I didn't bring comparisons with other jobs into this thread. Someone asked what "special" about pilots. Hence my reply Their job is quite different from other careers.

sinbadsailor said:
What about them,...
Click to expand...

Thats my point. What about them. You brought it up not me.

At the end of the day the company wants to relocate, (outsource in effect), existing jobs in order to reduce staffs pay and conditions. To circumvent existing hard won agreements. I don't that will improve things for exsiting staff. The business case for the move is marginal at best. Time will tell.
 
aircobra19 said:
At the end of the day the company wants to relocate, (outsource in effect), existing jobs in order to reduce staffs pay and conditions. To circumvent existing hard won agreements. I don't that will improve things for exsiting staff. The business case for the move is marginal at best. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

As far as I am aware none of the pilots in Dublin will be affected. They won't be asked to relocate, they won't be made redundant, they won't have a pay cut, they won't lose any pension entitlements, there won't be any change in their work practices...

So why are are they striking? What business is it of theirs what Aer Lingus does in belfast. They are paid to fly planes, not to dictate business decisions. As I said before, they can team up with Michael O Leary and let the management know what they think at an EGM. They don't have to ruin 50,000 peoples holiday plans, business trips etc to get their point accross
 
The pilots’ statement is a case study in selective use of the facts.
Dell has opened a plant in Poland. If Dublin or Limerick based staff wanted to apply for jobs there why should they get the same pay rates that they get here (unless they are offered a short term contract to relocate there in order to support the plant start up)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top