Aviapartner strike @ Brussels Airport (and Flightcare too)

[Conti764]

Would a third handler really be THE solution ??

If they start, they will be working under the same conditions (partair comitee) and thus minimum pays will be mandatory. So, where will the difference be ??

Minimum pays, yes, maximum pays, no. By making working and salary conditions better this BAC division ground handling (let's cal it BGC - Brussels Ground Care - for ease) controls some key employers in their operations better then when they work for a third party (like Flightcare or Aviapartner).
BGC wouldn't even have to make a profit since it's a division of BAC and by adding reliability to the ground services it helps the company to perform better overall. If FC and AP want to keep up with BGC and not loose to many companies to the airports own handling company.

For the employees things change for the better and they do not risk loosing their jobs, since with every plane BAC/BGC handles itself, they need more employees to do so.

For BAC it means more reliable ground services and for the companies it means they can trust Brussels Airport to make their operations work and keep it profitable.

As for the companies leaving BRU : how many people said they would no longer buy a Renault when they moved out of Belgium.
What is the first reaction of somebody who thinks he is bad treated : I will never fly your airline again, I will never buy your stuff again, I will never travel to your country again, .................

Yes, but then we are talking about regular people like you and me who respond emotionally, but after all we still buy in favor of our wallet.

In aviation we are talking about big enterprises, loosing money on a huge scale who just lost even more over a three day strike at Brussels Airport. If such event ever occurs again, they might start reconsider their operations at Brussels Airport.

[LX-LGX]

What solution? However many the operators, they'll all be operating under the same rules - that's what free enterprise is about. So all operators will be underpaying and overstressing their staff alike. No frigging use to add more.

Only people who don't know Aviapartner can post such stupid accusations.

Aviapartner is not underpaying it's employers, and surely not the (un)loaders. Alex Verougstraete didn't, and Theo Dilissen isn't.

Free enterprise also means: if you don't pay your employees enough, they will leave - and perhaps will join your competition.

[fc82091]

The main problem is there isn't a constant flow of work (pax section, not cargo)
there's a boom in the morning and some days in the evening but when those flights are done its falls back and you end up with too many teams for the rest of the time. FC and AP tryed to solve this costly problem by giving a lot of people 50% contracts with an anex to 75% or 100% in summer. those people don't stay too long and this is far from actractive for new people to join in.
second problem is people get too demanding when they need to perform a flexible hour job.
if BAC would start its own ground handling im sure they wouldn't keep it too long if there is no provit in sight in the near future

[744rules]

Would a third handler really be THE solution ??

If they start, they will be working under the same conditions (partair comitee) and thus minimum pays will be mandatory. So, where will the difference be ??

Minimum pays, yes, maximum pays, no. By making working and salary conditions better this BAC division ground handling (let's cal it BGC - Brussels Ground Care - for ease) controls some key employers in their operations better then when they work for a third party (like Flightcare or Aviapartner).
BGC wouldn't even have to make a profit since it's a division of BAC and by adding reliability to the ground services it helps the company to perform better overall. If FC and AP want to keep up with BGC and not loose to many companies to the airports own handling company.

For the employees things change for the better and they do not risk loosing their jobs, since with every plane BAC/BGC handles itself, they need more employees to do so.

For BAC it means more reliable ground services and for the companies it means they can trust Brussels Airport to make their operations work and keep it profitable.

As for the companies leaving BRU : how many people said they would no longer buy a Renault when they moved out of Belgium.
What is the first reaction of somebody who thinks he is bad treated : I will never fly your airline again, I will never buy your stuff again, I will never travel to your country again, .................

Yes, but then we are talking about regular people like you and me who respond emotionally, but after all we still buy in favor of our wallet.

In aviation we are talking about big enterprises, loosing money on a huge scale who just lost even more over a three day strike at Brussels Airport. If such event ever occurs again, they might start reconsider their operations at Brussels Airport.

Very nice in theory, but I think you forgot one thing

BAC is only interested in one thing : $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ + €€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€

[Atlantis]

Very nice in theory, but I think you forgot one thing

BAC is only interested in one thing : $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ + €€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€

I think that everybody is interested in $$$ and €€€, who can blame them. But to keep those dollars it's in the best interest of Brussels Airport to keep those airlines. And if they have to invest in an own handling company, so be it.

As for the companies leaving BRU : how many people said they would no longer buy a Renault when they moved out of Belgium.
What is the first reaction of somebody who thinks he is bad treated : I will never fly your airline again, I will never buy your stuff again, I will never travel to your country again, .................

If it was the first time, ok no problem, can happen. But in this case, it wasn't the first time. Every two months or longer there is a strike at Aviapartner (most of the time) or the firebrigade or customs, etc.
In these hard aviation time, every dollar counts and those airlines will have a solid an reliable airport.

[LX-LGX]

If it was the first time, ok no problem, can happen. But in this case, it wasn't the first time. Every two months or longer there is a strike at Aviapartner (most of the time) or the firebrigade or customs, etc.
In these hard aviation time, every dollar counts and those airlines will have a solid an reliable airport.

Indeed. The flemish newspaper Het Laatste Nieuws had a topic about the number of strikes some days ago. Brussels Airport had 25 strikes during the last 10 years (Sabena era included). I think "we" have even beaten Alitalia...

[Airbus330lover]

It's more than 1 on the six months !!!

[Air Key West]

I think major carriers will always want to fly to major airports. They have never stopped flying to MXP or FCO in spite of the many strikes in Italy and at Italian airports. And I don't think we have beaten AZ or Italy. If you include the last sabena years, figures will be distorted. Remember all airports or airlines are faced with strikes (recent LH strikes, BA and AF had strikes not so long ago, TP had a pilots strike recently, etc...).
As far as I'm concerned (but you don't have to agree with me) all LCCs and charter airlines may leave BRU for CRL or LGG. It would mean a few jobs lost at BRU, but a few more jobs at the other airports. Sometimes you loose, sometimes you win. Life is never an even path.
The one thing I don't quiet understand (but maybe someone can explain) is that, if I'm not mistaken, VEX used to do its own ground handling. So, when b.air was created from VEX and snba, why did b.air not set up its own ground handling company (since there was already a VEX "basis" to do this). In addition, b.air could have sold its ground handling services also to other carriers (lack of vision as usual ?). Then, there would have been three ground handlers at BRU. Or am I wrong on this one ?

[Atlantis]

The one thing I don't quiet understand (but maybe someone can explain) is that, if I'm not mistaken, VEX used to do its own ground handling. So, when b.air was created from VEX and snba, why did b.air not set up its own ground handling company (since there was already a VEX "basis" to do this). In addition, b.air could have sold its ground handling services also to other carriers (lack of vision as usual ?). Then, there would have been three ground handlers at BRU. Or am I wrong on this one ?

It's not so simple like that. You can't sell one unit to an other airline who is flying at Brussels Airport.
Everything is arranged via a KB on 12 November 1998. Only two groundhandlers were allowed: Sabena and Aviapartner. With the bankrupty of Sabena in 2001 they had to look for a player who was not active on the Belgian market. They found FCC in this story. BGS (Belgian Ground services) was born. A few years later it was transformed into Flightcare. It is the law who is responsible for this duo-monopoly: flightcare and Aviapartner.

If they will allow a third handler on the airside they have to change the KB.

[Air Key West]

Thanks for the explanation.
But doesn't this go back to the times when the airport was owned by the State ? Is BRU not a private company now ?
I am not saying you are wrong, you are probably right, but it does not sound logical to me if BRU is a private company. But maybe I have got this one wrong, too.

[luchtzak]

Everything is arranged via a KB on 12 November 1998. Only two groundhandlers were allowed: Sabena and Aviapartner. With the bankrupty of Sabena in 2001 they had to look for a player who was not active on the Belgian market. They found FCC in this story. BGS (Belgian Ground services) was born. A few years later it was transformed into Flightcare. It is the law who is responsible for this duo-monopoly: flightcare and Aviapartner.

If they will allow a third handler on the airside they have to change the KB.

I once heard that more than 2 groundhandlers it would become too dangerous to operate, so for safety issues they stick to 2.

[jan_olieslagers]

I once heard that more than 2 groundhandlers it would become too dangerous to operate, so for safety issues they stick to 2.

What is the situation at other major airports? Or perhaps rather, what is the situation at other airports of similar size/traffic volume? Is 2 a common maximum on the number of ground services suppliers?

[jan_olieslagers]

What solution? However many the operators, they'll all be operating under the same rules - that's what free enterprise is about. So all operators will be underpaying and overstressing their staff alike. No frigging use to add more.

Only people who don't know Aviapartner can post such stupid accusations.

Aviapartner is not underpaying it's employers, and surely not the (un)loaders. Alex Verougstraete didn't, and Theo Dilissen isn't.

Free enterprise also means: if you don't pay your employees enough, they will leave - and perhaps will join your competition.

My apologies. I must allow I know neither Aviapartner nor the other company nor any of the people you mention. My statement was based on the impression that workers at both companies are desperate about what they consider a disproportion between high work load and low pay. I still keep my point: however many the ground handling companies, all will be working under the same market constraints, so they'll have to squeeze their staff alike for a comparable pay. Otherwise they'll be too expensive and go out of business soon enough. The present poor situation will NOT be improved by the introduction of more ground handlers, working on the same conditions.

[Atlantis]

Thanks for the explanation.
But doesn't this go back to the times when the airport was owned by the State ? Is BRU not a private company now ?
I am not saying you are wrong, you are probably right, but it does not sound logical to me if BRU is a private company. But maybe I have got this one wrong, too.

Well, it's difficult to give a simple answer on that because we are living in a world with a lot of law's and rules. And because we live in Europe, it's also a European case. In 1996 they voted a new European rule where every member of the union is allowed to put maximum two handlers on the airside. In Belgium we can find this rule under number 96/67/EG of 15 november 1996. We are stick on it till 2011.

[Atlantis]

Everything is arranged via a KB on 12 November 1998. Only two groundhandlers were allowed: Sabena and Aviapartner. With the bankrupty of Sabena in 2001 they had to look for a player who was not active on the Belgian market. They found FCC in this story. BGS (Belgian Ground services) was born. A few years later it was transformed into Flightcare. It is the law who is responsible for this duo-monopoly: flightcare and Aviapartner.

If they will allow a third handler on the airside they have to change the KB.

I once heard that more than 2 groundhandlers it would become too dangerous to operate, so for safety issues they stick to 2.

We can find indeed in the same KB the paragraph about the safety, but in practice we can put a third handler on the airside without increasing dangerous situations.

The maximum of two handlers on Brussels Airport had also to do with the operation area. Let us go back to the year 2000. We had the Satellite, C-pier and the B-pier, Brucargo and DHL. After 8 years: the Satellite will be an office, C-pier will becomme a LCT with 15 gates, the new A-pier and Brucargo West (will be ready in 2012). After more then 10 years we can now say that a third handler is recommended because we reach the 20 million pax a year and the operation area is growing: Brucargo west + (extention of the A-pier?).

[Boeing767copilot]

CEO Peter Oostenenk has decided to leave Aviapartner.