Aer Lingus Strike
- Thread starter Sunny
- Start date
Yes, but we have established that pilots are special, and that Aer Lingus pilots are the mostest special ones of all!
I couldn't agree more. I work in specialised area, where training takes years and an investment of tens of thousands with no guarantee of success. It's unlikely mistakes on my part will cause people to die but it could potentially cost a company millions, or in the worst case cause the company to fail entirely. This is not in itself particularly special as many workers in the Irish economy are similarly skilled with similar levels of responsibility. At an aggregate level if we wish to avail of some of the highest wages in the world, then we need to be the most productive employees in the world.
If the Aer Lingus pilots are so in demand then the market will pay them highly for their services. It is likely that is why they feel they can act in such a childish, petulant manner without fear of retribution. However, it is truly disgusting that they take such a cavalier attitude to the jobs of their less well qualified co-workers who will lose their jobs if Aer Lingus fails as a result of the strike.
I don't know about surgeons but I know a few junior doctors and they work in absolutely brutal conditions. Still, as long as those pilots don't feel compelled to get out of bed if they're feeling a little out of sorts ...
What about the factory workers in a place like Boston Scientific in Galway or Allergan? If one of those factory workers that you dismiss so flippantly makes a mistake people could die. In the case of Allergan, or any other pharmaceutical company, thousands of people could die. It's unlikely but it is possible.
The airbus planes that Aer Lingus fly are capable of landing under auto pilot so it's not as if the poor pilot is up there flying by the seat of his pants. I am not saying that they don’t have a high level of responsibility or that they should not near the top of the heap pay wise in whatever country they are based in. I am saying that just like every other company in the free world Aer Lingus should have the right to hare locally at local rates.
G
gonk
Guest
And just like all other workers in the free world, the pilots have a right to withdraw their labour.
From the pilots' point of view, the above analysis is a bit simplistic. Belfast is very close to Dublin - with the new motorways, you could probably drive to Dublin Airport faster from Belfast than you could from Bray. The pilots are understandably concerned that if crew are hired in Belfast on worse pay and conditions than in Dublin, this may be used over time as a bargaining chip to reduce conditions in Dublin.
Comparing them with factory workers is not valid - Aer Lingus is an international transport company whose staff are by nature mobile. In the context of the recent switch of services from Shannon to Dublin, and the notorious case of Irish Ferries sacking its Irish workers to replace them with cheaper Eastern European labour, the pilots' position is entirely understandable.
aircobra19
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,733
At the end of the day theres always going to begrudgery (especially in Ireland) against well paid people protecting their jobs. Theres been a long history of trying to devalue pilots at aer lingus this is just another to add to the list.
aircobra19
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,733
Yes good analogy. A factory worker is solely responsible for a drug being made and getting to the consumer. Exactly the same thing.
Another good analog The planes flying themselves. Why don't you write and tell the airlines they are all fools for hiring pilots that take years to train, are expensive to train, retrain and pay. The planes fly themselves. Instant money saving.
[SIZE=-1]With the money saved Mannion could give himself another bonus. He got €982,000 last year incl a €260,000[/SIZE] bonus. Obviously hes feeling the pinch himself.
Here's my 2c worth;
1) It is almost amusing to see those bleating most loudly about the cuts in Shannon being those who welcomed/encouraged/drove the privatisation of Aer Lingus, i.e. IBEC and their fellow-travellers. It seems that their commitment to the free market economy flies straight out the window when their own back yard comes under threat.
2) It is of course a logical outcome of the privatisation that the Shannon service would be cut, if more profitable options exist for the Heathrow slot. And of course, it is only a matter of time before the Cork routes get cut. And once EI find that there are more profitable options for the transatlantic service than Dublin, we will find the direct Dublin-US flights cut in favour transiting via some low-cost hub (probably in the Baltics).
3) It is equally amusing to hear the proponents of the free market economy squeal when the employees start to play them at their own game, i.e. purchase shares and use shareholder power to direct the company strategy. Isn't the whole purpose of these companies to enrich shareholder value? And if the shareholders choose to do this through salaries and/or conditions (rather than dividends or capital growth), then surely the free market rules apply? So those who oppose this approach should either purchase a majority of shares to overrule them, or sell out and invest elsewhere?
4) It is no accident that EI advertised the pilots positions first for the Belfast. They know well that there isn't huge sympathy for those earning €100k+ salaries. Let's not lose sight of the fact that they will take exactly the same approach with the check-in staff, the trolly-dollies and the baggage handlers. All will get squeezed and squeezed down to minimum wage conditions. So the next time the check-in girl doesn't roll out the red carpet with her welcoming smile, you'll know why this happens. The next time the trolly-dolly had difficulty understanding your request to heat the baby's bottle (because of course, she can barely speak English), you'll know why this happens.
1) It is almost amusing to see those bleating most loudly about the cuts in Shannon being those who welcomed/encouraged/drove the privatisation of Aer Lingus, i.e. IBEC and their fellow-travellers. It seems that their commitment to the free market economy flies straight out the window when their own back yard comes under threat.
2) It is of course a logical outcome of the privatisation that the Shannon service would be cut, if more profitable options exist for the Heathrow slot. And of course, it is only a matter of time before the Cork routes get cut. And once EI find that there are more profitable options for the transatlantic service than Dublin, we will find the direct Dublin-US flights cut in favour transiting via some low-cost hub (probably in the Baltics).
3) It is equally amusing to hear the proponents of the free market economy squeal when the employees start to play them at their own game, i.e. purchase shares and use shareholder power to direct the company strategy. Isn't the whole purpose of these companies to enrich shareholder value? And if the shareholders choose to do this through salaries and/or conditions (rather than dividends or capital growth), then surely the free market rules apply? So those who oppose this approach should either purchase a majority of shares to overrule them, or sell out and invest elsewhere?
4) It is no accident that EI advertised the pilots positions first for the Belfast. They know well that there isn't huge sympathy for those earning €100k+ salaries. Let's not lose sight of the fact that they will take exactly the same approach with the check-in staff, the trolly-dollies and the baggage handlers. All will get squeezed and squeezed down to minimum wage conditions. So the next time the check-in girl doesn't roll out the red carpet with her welcoming smile, you'll know why this happens. The next time the trolly-dolly had difficulty understanding your request to heat the baby's bottle (because of course, she can barely speak English), you'll know why this happens.
Yes, I know what you mean.
Are you being sarcastic or do you not understand the point I made (or both)?
If any of the many people who make the drug screw up people can die, just as if any of the many people who keep the plane in the air screw up then people will die. Do you accept that or do you think the pilot designs, builds and services the aircraft, designs, builds and writes the software for the ground control systems, designs and builds the runways, audits the suppliers of all of the above etc?
If you do you should let the people at Airbus, Boeing, SITA, IBM, the CAA, the FAA and all the other hundreds of thousands of people all around the world who do jobs that if not done properly could result in people on airplanes dying.
aircobra19
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,733
It not the same thing at all. Most people are abstracted from the majority of risk through layers of QA, Validation etc. There would have to be lot of compunded mistakes in that kind of chain. A pilot might make a mistake and fly into the ground. No one else involved. Same with a doctor, wrong treatment, slip of a knife. Look how many avation accidents and incidents are "pilot error".
I agree. If the government want to keep Aer Lingus in Shannon (and I think they should) they should make it commercially attractive to do so.
This is pure conjecture informed by ideology rather than logic.
The employees are not doing so. A powerful group with a vested interest are attempting to use their shares to damage the rest of the company to serve their own selfish ends. I could paraphrase president Hoover here but I won’t.
All red herrings. Scare mongering with a very unpleasant xenophobic undertone.
I would support the pilots if Aer Lingus attempted to reduce their pay or conditions except in a situation of dire need. This is a protest about who runs the airline, the management or the pilots. The hiring of pilots in a different country has nothing to do with them. It is standard practice around the world that airlines hire at the local rate. Why should Aer lingus be different?
They won't get promoted. Aer Lingus are recruiting Captains. This means that they will never need to promote an existing Aer Lingus pilot. They will just retain them at this level, and use Belfast based pilots to fly out of Dublin.
Last edited:
What is FUD?
Why do you say propaganda? Do you not believe that millions work in terrible conditions?
The same principles apply - Employer trying to squeez maximum from the worker. Always when a company is not making a big enough profit, the blame is laid at the door of the worker. The wage bill is too high, the productivity is too low. A pity they have to pay wages atall.
Of course it is not about social justice and the rights of others.I didn't mean that they were demanding parity on behalf of prospective Belfast pilots for the good of society. They are demanding it so their jobs and promotional prospects won't all eventually go North." While I agree in general your comment is a bit general and simplistic. They were formed in an era of huge social change where democratic and egalitarian values that had become the norm for middle classes were permeating down to working class people. This was the same era when people began to challenge Empires and women struggled for equal rights. Most of these causes were supported and often actively run and funded by the trade union movement. Unions have, thankfully, won those battles and now while they do good work on a micro level they generally act to protect special interest groups and support policies that transfer wealth from the poor to the middle classes " [/QUOTE
Unions predated the events you refer to.
[/Quote " No it's not but he or ( she ) should earn more on merit. Remember "a fair days pay for a fair days work"? (It was in the Life of Brian) " [/QUOTE
And who decides what is a fair wage and a fair days work ?
" There is no reason why workers should employees (I dislike the term "worker") "
What do you dislike about the term ' worker' ?
"should not have all the good things you list above but again it should be based on merit. This is not the 1860's, people can move jobs if they don't like the one they have. They are not serfs or indentured servants. Your phrase "Why should once well paid jobs, become less well paid jobs?" is totally disingenuous. Aer Lingus is not reducing the pay of conditions of any pilot that works for them. A person getting paid €20K in Poland will have the same lifestyle as a person getting €100K in Ireland so if that's what local pilots earn why should any airline pay them much more because that's what their pilots get in another country."
Why is this disingenuous ? Eventually these Belfast pilots will be flying out of Dublin, which means that these striking pilots are fighting against being undercut. Aer Lingus need never recruit pilots in the Republic again. Anyway we are not talking about Poland. We are talking about a few miles down the road from Dublin.
" Attempting to establish any equivalence between pilots in a former semi-state airline and Dickensian mill workers is utterly bogus".
I'm not trying to. I'm pointing out that the world has not moved on much since that time. The conditions that made Unions neccessary then, still exist in the modern world. We tolerate and support, exploitation of workers because we have been convinced that profit takes precedence over people.
You should also do a bit of homework before you slot into secondary school debating society clichés about the big bad multinationals. I absolutely agree that they can and do behave very badly in some poor countries. Just remember that most of what we regard as exploitation of workers that takes place in those countries is perpetrated by locals and in many cases it is a result of abject poverty.
Don't be so patronising. I didn't refer to multinationals. Are you saying that it is ok to exploit workers if it is done by a ' local ' employer? If they got a fair wage then they wouldn't be in abject poverty would they?
But this strike is not some crusade for social justice, it's not about the rights of others and it's not about the good of society. It's about a privileged group of upper class professionals resisting a perceived threat to their position of power.
What is wrong with protecting their position? If the employer trys to take as much as he can, why can't the worker try to take as much as he can?
Yes, indeed it is conjecture, but no so much informed by ideology as informed by what happened during the privatisation. There was much conjecture about Shannon before the election, and Cullen was quite clear that Govt would use its shareholding to protect Shannon. Funny how things are not quite so clear-cut now. So just to be clear, are you suggesting that there will be no changes to the schedule for Cork over the next 12 months or so, and Dublin over the next 2-3 years?
That's one way of spinning it. Another way is to say that a group of employees are taking legitimate industrial action to protect their future within the airline. And if the ESOT come out and support the pilots, where will that leave us?
Unpleasant indeed, though not untypical of the views of the average EI customer. I don't understand your 'red herring' and 'scare mongering' reference. Are you suggesting that EI won't proceed to recruit low level staff on much lower rates than Dublin if they manage to break the pilots?
Perhaps it's a protest about who runs the airline, the management or the Board representing the shareholders?
Your phraseology is rather out dated. A carpenter with a couple of lads working for him, a small shop with a few staff, a milkman with a guy working for him, they are all employers. Your archaic way of looking at things suggests that none of the above work as they are not "workers" but "management". The bad news for those who are stuck in a 1900's mindset is that managers work and workers are involved in management.
In the real world of 2007 the clear lines you use to divide the world just don't exist.
sinbadsailor
Registered User
- Messages
- 240
FUB = Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt....it's all the padding, bull and other stuff in the media that is designed to prevent you getting to the base truth about something. In this case the unions sing the song that workers are being persecuted and need saving/protecting, but also more money to maintain their level of productivity.
Every private sector industry makes people 'earn' their bonus, wage increase and the professionals that try, are rewarded. The private sector can thrive without unions, so it's not all doom and gloom and 'protect the poor workers'. Unions are not needed, end of.
I do believe that 'some' workers are in bad conditions, but as I have heard before on various radio shows etc, you have to look at the local market where these factories are. Not everyone has the same standard of living, so a sweatshop to someone on the M50 in their air-conditioned X5 is a welcome change to someone who jsut got a job in the factory, that gets them out of the fields in 40+ degrees of heat for 14 hours a day.
Again, people do not have the ability to take all factors into account when posting their opinion.