Troubles at Brussels Airlines ? Part II

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

Locked
JOVAN
Posts: 484
Joined: 08 Jun 2006, 00:00

Post by JOVAN »

FlightMate wrote:Everybody?

I'd like to have a few example, please

That's quite a strong affirmation to question the legitimity of a strike.
My Dear,
We all have more stress, more pressure, more hassle, more competition on the job, so yes we work harder.
And look at the end of the month what you keep.
Compare to 4 or 5 years ago: we pay more direct, indirect, local taxes, more contributions, higher electricity bills etc..., yes we keep less.

Yes there are a few supermanagers and politicians that that are very well off.Try to get in that category.

FlightMate
Posts: 394
Joined: 15 Mar 2007, 14:39

Post by FlightMate »

yes we pay already more in our everyday's life, we don't have the need of another pay cut. (for me, enough is enough)

I don't seem to find any airline in Europe doing so (for the time of course).

airazurxtror
Posts: 3789
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 00:00

Post by airazurxtror »

JOVAN wrote:
Slavery: also a strong word to justfy a semi-wild action by spoiled pilots who cannot accept that the times have changed.
Everybody works more for less.
Somebody asked for an example of that.
A very recent example is at Volkswagen Forest/Vorst : the workers have recently agreed to work more hours for the same pay.
I think (not sure) it's 38 hours per week, up from 35.
It was that or final closure of the works. A very wise decision by the unions, for once.

foxtrot_lima_yankee
Posts: 145
Joined: 04 Nov 2005, 00:00

Post by foxtrot_lima_yankee »

A bit off-topic:

Politicians should actually be payed the less as they can t even approve Flight schools as being official schools approved by the ministry of education.
Belgium is one of the last countries in Europe to be avoiding that... It s such a shame, making hard-working students pay that 21% VAT!!

Be rich or keep dreaming is the message I suppose.

TCAS_climb
Posts: 445
Joined: 04 Jan 2004, 00:00

Post by TCAS_climb »

Can't think of anything more pathetic than this. I mean, from both sides.

Same old talking and argument: "support the union or it's the Stone Age again" and my personnal favorite: "I don't care about the problems I'm inflicting you because I have the constitutional right to ruin your entire week and make my customers loose much more than the staff could ever gain from going on strike, not to mention the self-inflicted damage to the financial health and corporate image of my company and myself included".

Is this a contest to find out who, from the management or the union, has the less respect for the people they're supposed to care for ? Good news: they both win ! Bad news: count on me to boycott BruAir if this rubbish goes on.

DELETED

Post by DELETED »

DELETED

DELETED

Post by DELETED »

DELETED

DELETED

Post by DELETED »

DELETED
Last edited by DELETED on 28 Apr 2007, 10:09, edited 1 time in total.

FlightMate
Posts: 394
Joined: 15 Mar 2007, 14:39

Post by FlightMate »

MarkyUK wrote: any more bright ideas?
Yes, don't drop the prices for GVA on every frequency we have.
But drop the price A LOT on flight leaving at the same time as Easy.

Somebody should always be looking on the other airlines (Sky europe and Easy) to see what their prices are, and change our prices accordingly.

We have a lot more flights to GVA than easy, we shouldn't loose our money by selling tickets at 35€ all day long.

(maybe all I write is already done)

--------------

Don't put Avros on fully booked routes (meaning leaving pax behind), instead use your half-filled A319 or B737...

foxtrot_lima_yankee
Posts: 145
Joined: 04 Nov 2005, 00:00

Post by foxtrot_lima_yankee »

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:
I'd like to hear how many more extra FREE hours a day all the office people at SN are doing for the new company? Or if their breaks have been cut, they need to work longer days and have lost some holidays on top too???


Sorry I didn t post that. check your sources first, mate.

And yes Geneva is a stupid choice for 5 times daily (means 1 aircraft and a half or 2 per day) when easy jet and co are starting to operate it. I know it s a good business destination, but there is better to do.

If all the planes are leased, then bru.air is doomed to fail.
I though thought that they bought over some of the ex-sabena 330's and 319's... though these are the last to be sold anyway.

As stated, the African network as well as the middle-east are the opportunities they need to take.

And if those Avro' s are all leased, why can t they get rid of them and lease some real money-makers like the new generation of Embraer's? Am sure they can get good offers seen that Embraer is looking for customers for its new category of aircraft. AM sure banks are ready to give them the money too.

User avatar
Established02
Posts: 1601
Joined: 16 Oct 2002, 00:00

Post by Established02 »

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote: Geneva is a stupid choice ... there is better to do ... the middle-east are the opportunities they need to take ... if those Avro' s are all leased, why can t they get rid of them ... lease some real money-makers like the new generation of Embraer's ... Am sure they can get good offers seen that Embraer ... AM sure banks are ready to give them the money too.
Actually, it really takes a lot of unique expertise to properly handle all these issues in the very different fields of network, revenue management, purchasing, finance. I believe one must have a quite serious profile to speak with authority about all these different matters at the same time. 8)

EBBR_Based
Posts: 50
Joined: 31 Mar 2007, 11:15

Post by EBBR_Based »

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:And yes Geneva is a stupid choice for 5 times daily
BRU-GVA is actually served 7x daily. Your suggestion to reduce the number of flights on this route clearly proves your lack of decent commercial/financial/business information and knowledge (for which I don't blame you, but don't act as a know-it-all if you don't have the necessary info to speak up).
foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:If all the planes are leased, then bru.air is doomed to fail.
Please enlighten us with a business case to explain your vision.
foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:As stated, the African network as well as the middle-east are the opportunities they need to take.
Again, I'm looking forward to a business case of those profitable routes SN's planning managers apparently never considered our thought of.
foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:And if those Avro' s are all leased, why can t they get rid of them and lease some real money-makers like the new generation of Embraer's?
Perhaps because carefully prepared studies proved that SN is currently better off with the ARJ?
foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:Am sure they can get good offers seen that Embraer is looking for customers for its new category of aircraft. AM sure banks are ready to give them the money too.
No offence, but it really looks like you are the missing link in SN's Purchasing department. Ever considered to apply for a job?
Flightmate wrote:Somebody should always be looking on the other airlines (Sky europe and Easy) to see what their prices are, and change our prices accordingly.
Looking at your posts, Flightmate, you obviously assume that "those from the offices" are sleeping on their desk all day, going home with another wage increase they all apparently got. Honestly, if SN is taking its airline business serious (of which I'm convinced they are), be sure that SkyEurope and Easyjet are being monitored VERY closely.
Flightmate wrote:Don't put Avros on fully booked routes (meaning leaving pax behind), instead use your half-filled A319 or B737...
SN certainly isn't putting 150-seaters on destinations without demand and ARJs on routes where "the flights are always full" on purpose. I assume it's much more profitable for SN to put a B734 with 164 seats on a route where you can attract 110 high yielding passengers, than putting an ARJ-100 on a route where you can even fill your plane with 200 seats but at very very low prices.

@MarkyUK: excellent posting, thanks a lot!

Greetings,
EBBR_Based

foxtrot_lima_yankee
Posts: 145
Joined: 04 Nov 2005, 00:00

Post by foxtrot_lima_yankee »

EBBR-based wrote:

Again, I'm looking forward to a business case of those profitable routes SN's planning managers apparently never considered our thought of.

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:
And if those Avro' s are all leased, why can t they get rid of them and lease some real money-makers like the new generation of Embraer's?


Perhaps because carefully prepared studies proved that SN is currently better off with the ARJ?


THEN WHERE IS BRU AIR'S PROFITABILITY??
FROM WHERE DO THEY THEN GET THE NEED TO PAY THEIR EMPLOYEES THE WORSE SALARY IN EUROPE WHILE RISKING A SERIES OF STRIKES ??
Maybe there are not enough studies done, don t you think?
There are many other ways to make an airline profitable than taking their employees to work more for the same salary.
This is this thread's great issue.
It s the actual mentality of the company.

And all they can say is: "we are looking for expansion in Africa".

They seem to be afraid of taking great decisions.
That' s what keeps them from earning great profits.
Too conservative...

LX-LGX
Posts: 2004
Joined: 20 Jan 2004, 00:00
Location: ANR

Post by LX-LGX »

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote: THEN WHERE IS BRU AIR'S PROFITABILITY??
FROM WHERE DO THEY THEN GET THE NEED TO PAY THEIR EMPLOYEES THE WORSE SALARY IN EUROPE WHILE RISKING A SERIES OF STRIKES ??
Maybe there are not enough studies done, don t you think?
There are many other ways to make an airline profitable than taking their employees to work more for the same salary.
This is this thread's great issue.
It s the actual mentality of the company.

And all they can say is: "we are looking for expansion in Africa".

They seem to be afraid of taking great decisions.
That' s what keeps them from earning great profits.
Too conservative...
With such employees on the payroll, no company will take the risk to invest any further. Just look what you did with the recent launch of Brussels Airlines, for which a multi million promotion campaign was set up. The investment was done to get media coverage like ... there's a new airline, Brussels Airlines, SNBA + VEX, it's nice it's Belgian, b.flex - b.light, cheap flights from Brussels. But you've managed by the stupid uniform story and the refusal to serve drinks that all media attention went to your protest. Your message to the public indeed was: don't fly with us, because sooner or later, we'll go on strike (het is aan 't rommelen).

If Travel Magazine would add a new Self Destruction Award to their annual event, I will ask Robrecht Willaert to nominate you (although competition from the guys from the fire brigade will be severe).

Worst salaries in Europe? Why then do you stay with them???

foxtrot_lima_yankee
Posts: 145
Joined: 04 Nov 2005, 00:00

Post by foxtrot_lima_yankee »

Lx, I agree with you that the staff has to support its new brand, but the management is making use of the brand name change to set new rules, in the disadvantage of the staff.
Althoug I am not a Bru.air staff and I shared in the beginning the same point of view as you are expressing, talking with staff made me realise how tricky this company is becoming:
-30 minutes turn-arounds
-More hours, same paycheck (as in VW Vorst) although already bad salaries
-Social problems with staff leaving the company
-Leaving travellers to their faith in Dakar

All this in less than a month...

Why do pilots fly with Bru.air?
I can explain that to you:

Only Belgian carriers hire pilots with less than 500hours TT.
I m talking about TT and not about time on jet.
Belgium is one of the most expensive countries (after the UK and some others) when it comes to build hours, as it does not have a student status applicable to student pilots and very hard VAT policies.
Yes, the cheapest flight hour available is 110€ per hour incl 21%VAT.
So students here tend to have far less hours than students in the USA for example, who pay the same hour sometimes less than 50$.
And for this reason Belgian student pilots have no choice but to apply at Bru.air, TNT,...or to become flight instructors to build some hours and try their luck somewhere else afterwards.
As these companies pay the worst salaries, only students desperate of finding a job apply.
Some leave the company for better horizons afterwards.

The salary of the starting pilot at SN is around 1300€ before taxes, according to sources in SFA (Sabena Flight Academy)

dre
Posts: 125
Joined: 12 Dec 2003, 00:00

Post by dre »

Hello FLY,


Sorry but this is just nonsense. Companies in the Netherlands do exactly the same. I know loads of guys who joined DenimAir, KLM, Transavia, TUIfly Netherlands who joined with low hours. In the UK loads of guys go from school straight into the right hand seat of a jet. I will tell you more. I know people who were rejected in the SN psychological test who after that went straight to the UK to fly Airbus 320 and B757 in Monarch, Thomsonfly, My travel, etc etc.
I agree that the Belgian tax system is not the best and that pilots have usually lower salaries than in Belgium compared with the rest of (Western) Europe, but everyone just has to look what are his/her priorities. Social life, high salary, living close to family.

Neverthless, it is sad to see how the Belgian aviation has to face all those (often the same) problems everytime over and over again. While other markets are growing at a steady rate, Belgium is far behind. This is not only due to Brussels airlines or any other Belgian carriers, i think it is due to the political climate, the high Belgian taxes and "bureaucrazy", and the belgian attitude.

Grtz

Dre

LX-LGX
Posts: 2004
Joined: 20 Jan 2004, 00:00
Location: ANR

Post by LX-LGX »

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:talking with staff made me realise how tricky this company is becoming:
-30 minutes turn-arounds
-More hours, same paycheck (as in VW Vorst) although already bad salaries
-Social problems with staff leaving the company
-Leaving travellers to their faith in Dakar
All this in less than a month...

Typical union desinformation.

- contrary to charters (who kan ask people to check-in at 03h00 a.m.), Brussels Airlines has certain departure hours that passengers regard as acceptable. The 10 minute decrease will allow the airline to have 1 more flight a day per plane, thus allowing a better productivity from their planes. And, in some cases, to have an ETA that is more suitable for pax.

- one incident with one pilot who already has left the company is not "social problems with staff leaving the company". The Belgian Labour Law is very clear about that: if an employee has ... years of service, he/she has to give ... weeks notice of his/her departure. It's a legal obligation to announce it, and it's a legal right to leave afterwards. Not a single pilot is forced to stay with the company if he/she wants to leave. Off course an airline is not happy if a good pilot leaves, but like the Labour Law allows a pilot to quit, the same law doesn't forbit an airline to be unhappy about that. The incident you're talking about happened with a pilot who has allowed to leave.

- it is not fair from you to use one incident in Dakar (not caused by a member of the Board or a senior Belgian Manager) to say it's company policy to give up pax. That's typical union desinformation once again: one employee on duty at Dakar goes home because he thinks he cannot do anything anymore for stranded pax (= to find more hotels rooms), and you say it's company strategy. Off course Brussels Airlines will accept (has accepted) full responsability for that incident, and THAT IS company policy: Brussels Airlines cares about their passengers, and if one or other employee damages pax, the company will pay. That is why most people like me (those who are buying the tickets) still prefer Brussels Airlines to Ryanair or Easyjet.

You want a proof of the company stategy about pax? In November 2006, I've received this from Belgian biggest consumer organisation (sorry, no English - Dutch and French only):

Wanneer de heer V. zich bij de check-in aanmeldt op de luchthaven van Brussel-Nationaal voor zijn vlucht met SN Brussels Airlines naar Oslo, verneemt hij dat de deuren een kwartier tevoren werden gesloten. Hij had zich klaarblijkelijk vergist van uur en is helemaal van de kaart want hij moet die dag absoluut in Oslo zijn voor zijn werk. Gelukkig heeft hij niet veel bagage bij zich. De bediende van SN beslist daarom hem een speciale toegangskaart te geven. Ze verwittigt onmiddellijk haar collega’s aan de gate dat er nog een passagier aankomt. Ondertussen haast de heer V. zich naar de gate. Maar bij de veiligheidscontrole vindt men in zijn bagage een etui met scherpe voorwerpen. De heer V. legt uit wat er is voorgevallen. Hij vertelt dat zijn bagage normaliter had moeten worden ingecheckt, maar dat men uitzonderlijk heeft toegestaan dat hij zijn spullen mee in het vliegtuig mocht nemen. Het zijn voorwerpen die hij absoluut nodig heeft voor zijn werk. Daarop brengt een veiligheidsbeambte de heer V. persoonlijk naar het vliegtuig en vraagt de captain of de voorwerpen mee in de cabine mogen. De captain heeft liever van niet, maar hij neemt wel de moeite om de koffer met de gevaarlijke voorwerpen zelf in de laadruimte van het vliegtuig te stoppen. En hij heeft de heer V. bovendien mooi op tijd in Oslo gebracht!

Lorsque Monsieur V. se présente au check-in de l’aéroport de Bruxelles-National pour son vol SN Brussels Airlines vers Oslo, il apprend que l’enregistrement est terminé depuis un quart d’heure; il s’est en réalité trompé d’heure de vol. Devant son désarroi (il doit absolument se rendre à Oslo ce jour-là pour raison professionnelle), et comme il n’a pas beaucoup de bagages, l’employée de SN lui remet une carte de passage spéciale et prévient immédiatement ses collègues postés à la porte d’embarquement de l’arrivée d’un passager de dernière minute. V. se hâte donc vers la porte d’embarquement avec ses bagages mais, au contrôle de sécurité, on détecte dans sa valise un étui contenant des outils tranchants. V. explique la situation et précise que sa valise aurait normalement dû être enregistrée mais que vu son retard, on l’a laissé la prendre avec lui dans l’avion ; il explique qu’il s’agit d’outils de travail qui lui sont indispensables. Un employé de la sécurité accompagne alors V. jusqu’à l’avion pour demander au commandant de bord si ces outils peuvent être embarqués en cabine. Le commandant préfère que non, mais il prend la peine de déposer personnellement la valise contenant les outils dangereux dans la soute de l’avion. L’erreur de V. n’a donc finalement pas porté à conséquence.

Short translation: a passenger who was too late at check-in was extremely well helped by "the system": check-in staff gave him a special boarding card, security staff and ground staff then braught him to the captain because he had dangerous goods in his hand luggage (which was supposed to have been checked in). Plane left on time, passenger on board, luggage on board.

foxtrot_lima_yankee
Posts: 145
Joined: 04 Nov 2005, 00:00

Post by foxtrot_lima_yankee »

Sorry but this is just nonsense. Companies in the Netherlands do exactly the same. I know loads of guys who joined DenimAir, KLM, Transavia, TUIfly Netherlands who joined with low hours.

Well at KLM they take you with low hours but you will start as 2nd officer on the 3rd seat on the B747's long-haul network. You will need to fly like that for at least 6 months before getting to the right-hand seat, depending of the needs of the company.
And then again, students coming out of KLM Flight Academy(125000€integrated ATPL) will get first priority and chances for a Belgian graduate with low-hours is very very low.

And do not forget that companies in Netherlands would give priority to Dutch frozen ATPL's rather than to take Belgian pilots. The same is valid if a young pilot wants to enter Air France for instance. Air France has its own school and takes their students first.

It would though surprise me that DenimAIr would recruit young graduates, the standars for VLM, sister-company of DenimAir are very high...

So a Belgian student pilot with low hours has no choice but to apply with a Belgian carrier.

And the politics played a role in the high taxes, I totall agree.
It was frequently talked about in parlement, but since the bankruptcy of Sabena, there is little need for more pilots in Belgium and so they apply the same "be rich or die trying" policy to us.

The times that Sabena payed for your full trainings are passed history

Johan23
Posts: 62
Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 00:00
Contact:

Post by Johan23 »

Do some of you guys stay awake all night bothering about the future of B.A.? If so why? Perhaps we can start ANOTHER topic about Brussels Airlines again pffff... What does trigger some of you to write such long ideas, thoughts, bull... Nothing else to do perhaps? It bothers me I must say. Can we agree on nagging on another company for a while? Let's say mmmm E.A.T., a lot of unhappy people over there too...

Happy landings,
J

airazurxtror
Posts: 3789
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 00:00

Post by airazurxtror »

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:
Why do pilots fly with Bru.air?
I can explain that to you:

Only Belgian carriers hire pilots with less than 500hours TT.
I m talking about TT and not about time on jet.
If I understand correctly, Belgian carriers hire pilots who other European carriers wouldn't hire because they are not experienced enough ?
If so, it means that flying on a Belgian carrier is more risky ?
Ryanair is allegedly not a safe carrier, it has had many incidents, ans so on - nevertheless, to be hired as co-pilote on Ryanair, you need 500+ hrs on type.

Locked