Aer Lingus cabin crew plan work-to-rule industrial action later this month

by B. N. Sullivan

IMPACT, the union that represents cabin crew at Irish carrier Aer Lingus, announced that its membership have voted overwhelmingly in favor of an industrial action, claiming that the airline unilaterally imposed contract changes last month. Aer Lingus cabin crew are not planning a strike; rather, they will work within their their existing contracts, i.e., the contract that was in place up until the time of this dispute.

According to the union, 67% of Aer Lingus cabin staff submitted ballots; of those, 96% were in favor of the work-to-rule plan, and only 4% against.

In a press release, IMPACT officials explained the union's position:

The dispute between cabin crew and Aer Lingus arose when management unilaterally imposed massive changes to working arrangements, supposedly to achieve the objective of 850 flying (or ‘block’) hours a year as part of cabin crews’ overall working time. Full-time cabin crew are currently contracted to work a 39-hour week, although they are only paid for 35 hours under an earlier productivity concession.

Cabin crew have accepted the requirement to increase flying hours to 850 a year, as part of overall working time, as set out in an agreed ‘Greenfield’ cost saving plan. They have not voted to accept the changes imposed by management last month.

Proposals for further changes to existing rules to achieve the annual 850 flying hours have been the subject of a Labour Relations Commission process, involving IMPACT and Aer Lingus management, as required under the ‘Greenfield’ plan agreed by management and unions.

But last month the company breached the ‘Greenfield’ agreement by unilaterally abolishing the existing agreed rules on working time and imposing new rosters based on minimum legal protections. These allow cabin crew to work 60 hours over a seven-day period, including long shifts without breaks.

IMPACT official Christina Carney said the ‘Greenfield’ plan, which was brokered by the Labour Relations Commission and accepted by cabin crew in a ballot in March 2010, did not contain the roster changes imposed by the company. Neither did it allow the company to arbitrarily impose changes to contracts or working rules. The union also says the imposition of the legal minimum rules is unnecessary to achieve the agreed changes and is contrary to practices used in most airlines.

Ms Carney said: “The 850-hours flying time can be achieved by agreeing changes to the existing working rules rather than abandoning them. June 2010 was the airline’s most successful month ever in terms of passenger numbers and yields, and that was achieved on the basis of existing contracts. For staff, this was a cause for celebration and continued commitment to working together to maintain the company’s success, in part by finishing the negotiations on an agreed implementation of increased flying hours. But management instead abandoned the negotiation and arbitration process being brokered by the Labour Relations Commission and unilaterally imposed unnecessary changes that nobody has voted on, let alone agreed, and which would leave cabin crew working 60 hours in seven days,” she said.

Aer Lingus responded with this statement:

Aer Lingus notes the outcome of the Impact Cabin Crew ballot. While we are at a loss to understand why another ballot was necessary, we welcome the decision by Impact Cabin Crew to work to their contracts and in particular the public confirmation earlier today by Impact that all cabin crew will work to the agreed 850 flight hours per year. These elements have always been an intrinsic part of the overall Greenfield cost saving plan and we welcome this clarification.

We continue to be party to the arbitration process however we will continue to gradually phase in the agreed productivity levels so that we can realign the cost base of the Company and position Aer Lingus for a successful future for the benefit of our staff, our shareholders and the travelling public.

IMPACT officials have stated that the union "is available for talks with the company or the State’s industrial relations bodies."

The union says their planned action will have no impact on flight schedules in and out of Ireland, and that this will not change "unless management escalates the dispute by taking disciplinary action against one or more cabin crew members for working within their existing contracts."

Pilots wary of proposed United Airlines/Aer Lingus partnership

Last month United Airlines and Irish carrier Aer Lingus announced "an innovative extension of their relationship on select long haul services between Europe and North America." Under terms of the agreement -- made possible by the Open Skies Air Services Agreement between the European Union and the United States -- the two carriers plan to offer daily service between Washington-Dulles and Madrid, beginning in March of 2010. While the fine details of the deal have not been publicly announced, this partnership appears to be something more than a mere code-share alliance, and crews on both sides of the Atlantic are unhappy with what they suspect will be an attempt to use the new arrangement to outsource their jobs.

The United Airlines/Aer Lingus joint announcement said:

It is intended that both carriers will equally share the commercial and operating benefits and risk, with Aer Lingus managing the operational aspects of the new partnership services and United Airlines taking responsibility for managing revenue generation. The Partnership route structure will be operated and sold under both Aer Lingus and United Airlines codes and will leverage both parties’ network capabilities.

Translation, according to word on the street, is that Aer Lingus will supply up to three A330 aircraft to fly the route, and United will do the marketing. The catch seems to be that neither carrier's crews will operate the flights.

How can this be? If the aircraft operate under the current Aer Lingus certificate, shouldn't Aer Lingus crews fly the aircraft? That's what the pilots are wondering.

Will the joint venture be issued a separate operator's certificate? And if so, would that allow them to recruit and hire crew members who are employed by neither United nor Aer Lingus?

The pilot unions at both airlines have signed a joint protocol agreement "to protect the interests of pilots from both airlines in light of the recently announced partnership between United and Aer Lingus." United pilots are represented by the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), and Aer Lingus pilots are represented by the Irish Air Line Pilots Association (IALPA).

"It is imperative that we work together on both sides of the Atlantic to prevent the anti-labor aspects of this agreement from impacting pilots from our two airlines," said Captain Steve Wallach, chairman of the United unit of ALPA. "This partnership between United and Aer Lingus will set a dangerous precedent regarding international air travel where pilots on both sides of the Atlantic will pay a steep price. We will explore every regulatory, legislative and legal avenue to protect the rights and careers of our members."

"We are very pleased to have entered into this protocol agreement with the United pilots and we will be working with them to confront the challenges this partnership poses to both our pilot groups," said Captain Evan Cullen, president of the IALPA. "We look forward to working with our United colleagues to explore every option to end our respective company’s blatant disregard and lack of loyalty to their pilots, as well as to their corporate identities."

UPDATE Feb. 3, 2009: Aviation news website FlightGlobal.com reported on this story today. Their article adds the following bit of information:

Aer Lingus today confirmed it is setting up a base in Washington to recruit pilots and cabin crew to support the operations, which are scheduled to begin in March 2010.

Hmmm, just as we suspected. Something tells me this is going to get nasty.

Aer Lingus strike averted - Pilots approve Belfast deal

Earlier this week, pilots at Aer Lingus called off a strike that could have grounded the airline's entire fleet, seriously disrupting air service between Britain and Ireland. In dispute was the airline's intention to hire pilots for a new hub in Belfast under terms that differed from terms for pilots flying out of Dublin.

The pilots' union, the Irish Airline Pilots Association (IALPA), and Aer Lingus management were able to come to an agreement at the last minute regarding the airline's plans for a new Belfast base. Today the Irish Times reports that 80% of the pilots voted in favor of the new proposals:

Under the deal agreed, pilots employed at bases outside Dublin will only be appointed on the basis of seniority.

Pilots at the Belfast operation will be recruited on local pay and conditions and similar arrangements will apply to other bases established overseas in the future.

A separate pension scheme will apply for pilots recruited for Belfast. But pilots in the Republic moving to the North on secondment will retain their existing pension scheme.

Promotions to the rank of aircraft captain at bases internationally in the future will be on the basis of the existing Aer Lingus seniority list rather than by direct entry competition.

Aer Lingus has plans to open the new Belfast base in January of 2008.