Cabin Crew Pay Update *2nd NOV*

i think that it is about time that we all considered the whole issue of pay in any service industry. My own industry (funerals) is in some ways even more poorly paid than the cabin crew. How many of you out there would get out of bed in the middle of the night to move someone who had jumped infront of a train or had been found dead at home after a few months for about £45 before tax. This is what staff in my industry do most days of the week. Even this amount of money is above the union wage which would give you about £30 for doing this.

The same applies to the cabin crew, yes, they are providing many different services, and are trained for many more that most passengers are not even aware of. To me the big point is the disruption to ordinary life, as basically you don't have one. I work long and unsocial hours but at least i am at home at some point during the night. Cabin crew are sent to far flung corners of the world where in many cases the conditions are not too salubrious, they just about have time to sleep and recover from the outbound trip before returning and working again.

We all should remember that we were paying the same amount of money for our trips about 20 years ago as we are now. There must be savings somewhere and this is obviously coming from the services provided and staff costs.

I am not totally defending the cabin crew, they did know the pay when they took on the job and i am a great believer in people making decisions and having to put up worth the consequences but to me this is so much of a bigger issue in any service industry. If you want first class service you have to pay for it. i would also be very pissed off if my holiday flights were cancelled due to strike action.

Sorry about the rant but this is an important matter which affects more than cabin crew and the airline workers.

Stuart

[Darren Wheeler]

One point that doesn't seem to have been answered is what happens if after, for example, a 24-hour strike or series of strikes, Virgin still say there is no more on the table?

Indefinite strike or just accept the current offer knowing you are out of pocket?

Your talking VS now, not BA, it won't go that far.

[Darren Wheeler]

I wouldn't bank on that........

The attitudes in this dispute do so remind me of the comments of many industrial workers in the 1970's, the 'they cannot do without us' and 'they have made lots of profit, its time we had some of it' and 'we are worth more than they are paying us'

In the end, they Could do without them, many went bust as they did not have the finances left ti invest and cheaper non British rivals came in to steal the buisness as people went for cheap and took a stand against the 'always striking or they disrupted my holiday' workers.
Its a big old world out there, with many doing the same jobs for less than UK workers as many have found out to their cost.

Because Virgin is a British company does not mean it has to continue to employ British workers, or even expand flights from UK bases with British workers, not if it can do it with European bases and European workers, Asian workers and Far East workers.

A strike benefits the opposition only, the company gets a bad name, loses passengers, and the workers lose wages that they NEVER get back, as well as possibly losing their jobs to foreign workers/competition.

We seem to have not learned anything from the seventies, and some in the Trades Unions want to drag their members back to those 'Good old days'

Across the board in the UK, there seem to be disgruntled workers.

However, while I'm sure many of their claims are reasonable by themselves, one has to look at the bigger picture. With the public sector example, the workers have to understand that it would make very bad policy for the government to relent AT THE MOMENT - perhaps in a few years when inflation is down a %pt, but not right now.

In a similar way, right now is not a suitable time to be giving out above inf. pay rises in the airline industry because there is a fair bit of financial uncertainty at the moment and we may be heading into a downswing in the economy. Airline travel, for the most part, is very responsive to the performance of the economy. If people have to tighten spending in the next year, the airlines will be hit hard as many will not want to spend all that money on a long-haul holiday. Therefore, airlines such as VS will have to cost-cut with all the trimmings and a recent pay-rise will hurt the airline even more.

45.

Hi There

Just wanted to add my point of view as a crew member who has worked for Virgin for 11 years. Basically I love my job immensely however I am struggling to keep my head above water financially. It's not as simple as if 'you don't like it leave' as I do really really love my job with a passion. So what do I do? Leave or fight for a chance to stay in a job that truly still brings me happiness after all these years?

I don't feel that we are being greedy at all, just asking for a pay rise that brings us in line with other UK based airlines and without a variety of conditions such as losing our airshare. I certainly do not want to strike but I also want to be appreciated for all the hardwork and dedication I have shown Virgin over the years. I really do not think that is unreasonable.

[Pete]

Originally posted by southernbelle
Hi There

Just wanted to add my point of view as a crew member who has worked for Virgin for 11 years. Basically I love my job immensely however I am struggling to keep my head above water financially. It's not as simple as if 'you don't like it leave' as I do really really love my job with a passion. So what do I do? Leave or fight for a chance to stay in a job that truly still brings me happiness after all these years?

I don't feel that we are being greedy at all, just asking for a pay rise that brings us in line with other UK based airlines and without a variety of conditions such as losing our airshare. I certainly do not want to strike but I also want to be appreciated for all the hardwork and dedication I have shown Virgin over the years. I really do not think that is unreasonable.

I don't disagree that you are worth more (actually, you personally are worth a mint!), but striking is possibly the worst way to go about getting demands. Many have outlined the downsides, and as AlanA so clearly put it, did we learn nothing from the 70s?

Pete

Unfortunately Pete there are situations where the only way to get around it is to strike, unless there are better ways of getting around it?

I can see both views of the argument here, but at the end of the day it is the crew that is suffering. I take into account southernbelle's comment regarding the financial side of things and let's not forget the UK is now becoming an increasingly expensive place to live in which is all right for some people, but not for others.

All the cabin crew want is to be given a fair deal and that which brings them in line, or even exceed, the equivalent offerings of other UK-based airlines. I accept that crew don't want to strike for reasons already discussed to death, and my viewpoint is that if the crew think that the only way that they are going to get what they want they will strike. If VS don't like it then the ball is in their court to reach a compromise, or give in to their demands. And to put simply if they don't change, the strikes continue and the vortex grows.

I hope the staff get a satisfactory result without striking I genuinly do.

I am however saddened to read some staffers post which seems to demonstrate a disdain for their employers and equally of passengers as well.

I sit at a desk and fly in UCS but worked my nuts off for the position and the flight ticket, I also resent being referred to as being something that must be fed and watered ( the most expensive crappy food going at that in UCS.)

By all means have agripe with your employers, but an attitude problem with customers is not something that would earn my respect nor my custom nor for that matter a pay rise...sorry.

[Decker]

Spoke to a young lady tonight who has just been accepted as crew for Qantas. She was very excited and opined that whilst she likes Virgin she couldn't afford to work for them as the pay was so bad...

I just hope my house staff aren't reading this thread. God knows, the Tesco Christmas puds last year were barely enough to stave off revolution.

GJ

[Pete]

Originally posted by VS075
Unfortunately Pete there are situations where the only way to get around it is to strike, unless there are better ways of getting around it?

No, I think the majority of the arguments put forward in this thread state that striking is not a way to achieve the goals. Virgin will lose money and customers; that will not put them in a position to find any extra cash for staff, and if anything will lead to job cuts to try and keep their head above water. Striking is not a sensible option in a margin-tight, competitive industry.

Are there any windows being discussed for possible industrial action, are we looking at a week from now, a month from now etc...

I have a VS flight coming up and my schedule is completely unflexible, I'd rather just cancel and fly BA instead if there is any chance I could miss that flight. I support the cabin crews position and I hope they get an agreement they can live with, but like many VS customers I've got things to do and specific dates to do them on.

Its not a strike that will do anyone any good, its the 'threat' of a strike that carries the weight, and a huge gamble too as the management push things to the limit of calling the unions bluff.

Once there is really a strike everyone loses and public opinion shifts fromstaff to management.

In this case I think the customers will suffer with soft option action, like going to work but not talking to customers politely, or not serving food and drinks or answering calls from seats ( yes I know what your thinking lol ).

Can I ask what would happen if there was a srike?

For those of us on 'basic' tickets (cheapest, not flexible) - would we just lose out completely, write off the amount of the ticket and have to book ourselves onto another flight at our own cost? Or would Virgin move us onto another flight on another day?

Any info?

Thanks

Clare

[preiffer]

Hi Clare,

Virgin would NORMALLY try to put you onto alternative flights with other carriers, OR make you wait a couple days until flights start operating again.

Can't guarantee it though.

The one thing that *could* bugger people up now is the fact that it's widely known that VS crew are considering industrial action. Most insurance companies have exclusion causes about 'where the threat of strike is known'. So... They could be ar*eholes about it should anyone be booking a flight from now on. [:0]

Thanks Preiffer.

I have an annual policy which I took out in January so hopefully I will be covered as I booked my flight in January/February as well. Mind you, knowing what insurance companies are like ..... [n]

[Darren Wheeler]

They could be a real pain and say it's known about, but until a ballot is held and the result announce it is still rumour.

I have been reading this discussion with interest and thought I would add my thoughts as a Frequent flyer but also as serving in the industry in question.

I'm sure many of the customers are aware of this but just a little history on the subject (feel free to correct me if I am wrong) as sometimes all the customer hears is the headline 'Virgin Crew to strike' and naturally become very concerned, especially if they have flights booked.

The first offer

Basic increase of 2% on basic and trip pay effective 1st April 2007 (date current deal expired)

In return the company wanted ;

assign 6 blocks of monthly standby in 3 years (5 at present)
Reset this count o zero for all newly promoted crew
remove 4 hour callouts replace with Available day the day before standby
Removal of one Guaranteed weekend off when on monthly standby
crew sick on standby months to be re-rostered their standby month.
Crew who are promoted to a new rank do not receive the salary for that associated role until they have been in the role 12 months.


The union advised against this offer - It was rejected 99% NO vote - If I recall the 1% was spoilt ballots, obscenities directed at the company written on the returned ballots.

Then came the 2nd offer

Basic 2% Increase from April 2007 and then 1.5% from October, 2.8% the next year

No increase in trip pay for 15 months
more standby

Union advised against and there was an overwhelming reject percentage again

Then came the 3rd Offer (latest)

Basic 4.8% in year 1 and RPI in year 2&3. Trip pay increased 15% during the 2 year

backdated from July (not April when last deal expired)
one more month of monthly standby
removal of one crew member on the 340-600
proposal to have one protection block on standby months

The union proposed acceptance of this offer - outcome 92% NO, the last ballot also indicated the crew member would be willing to take part in industrial action.


It is clear to see that the offers have significantly improved however this has only been due to a strong crew resolve. At the time the company issued the seconds offer it also stated this would be it's final offer and would be negotiating no further, thus in effect trying to back the crew into a corner. It is clear to see the outcome.

The 3rd offer is significantly better than the others, however it would appear the crew felt that the addition of extra standby blocks (instead of recruiting more crew to cover shortage and improve customer service instead of going crew down) was not acceptable. The removal of a crew member on the 600 would increase the crews workload and reduce customer service (alredy a hot potato). The protection offered on Standby blocks being removed were all reductions in their working conditions which did not outweighs the benefits. I do feel however if this had been the initial offer it may have been accepted or the vote would have been considerably less than 92% NO -however the company appears to be alienating its crew member with the insulting offers up to the 3rd one.

The company is willing to invest serious money in many areas as significant cost, club houses, the base etc etc however when it comes to investing in the crew it appears there must be something that gives at the crews cost each time. Many crew have been here for eons and have seen their lifestyle, terms and conditions reduce. They now feel why should I take further reductions in my lifestyle and working conditions just to receive a pay rise that is in line with inflation ? (would any other job ?)

The argument of - you knew what you were getting into why not just leave is a historically debated one (but not one I would expect to hear from a forum Moderator !!??). Unfortunately almost any other job in the world if you leave your job you re-enter into another company in a position that is equal if not better to your last role. Unfortunately in the airline industry promotion and rank is something which is allocated by seniority, time served in the company. Thus someone who has been here 10 years and is a senior FSM would become a junior cabin crew member at the likes of BA if they left and joined them. 10 years ago the terms and working conditions were different - why should employees be forced out of a job by dwindling terms and conditions ? This is what unions were designed to protect.

Will strike action resolve anything - The only thing strike action will achieve is upsetting existing passengers (such as myself) and forcing them to plan/use competitors (as happened with the threat of BA/BMI action). However the ball is clearly in the companies court now and I would like to think that given the strength of the last vote it is a clear indication that the crew are willing to strike if the company does not start to make serious offers without the reduction in T&C's.

Rumour has it that the company already has another offer ready and the last deal was set such that it would tide the company past the last bank holiday to avert strike action on that date. The crew are not going to fall for that again - so I imagine after a strong strike ballot a series of strikes will be lined up at strategic dates - though it would be foolish for the company to think the crew will not follow this through. Further rumour has it that crew who are due interviews and courses for promotion in the airline have been postponed until the pay debacle is resolved. If this is true it would be sad and another demonstration that the company is trying to squeeze the employees (who are waiting for said courses) into voting in it's favours.

I do not want to see strike action, I would like to see a sensible offer from the company that reflects the hard work of of the crew - at the same time the company must appreciate that there will be a cost for this and it can not recoup this cost by making the crews work harder or reducing their T&C's.

Well, there we have it, my one and only post on the topic. Good luck to the crew, passengers and managers. Personally I think the pay offers thus far have sent a message to the crew that sadly depicts a management which does not care about its employees.

As a passenger who has flights booked with Virgin naturally I am concerned about these flights but not to the point where I feel I should not be inconvenienced it it means 3-4000 crew would receive better working conditions (besides I'm sure my travel insurance protects me against cancelled flights anyway).

[Decker]

Now all we need is a pro-management position individual to sign up as 'The REAL voice of reason' and argue cogently from the management perspective. We already have several crew who post in a reasonable voice. Arrogance and reasonableness are not good bedfellows.

I'm a little perplexed why on a non-VS affiliated site you would expect all mods to adopt a 'crew are always right' stance. We're all individuals and as such have differing views of the situation.

Originally posted by Decker
I'm a little perplexed why on a non-VS affiliated site you would expect all mods to adopt a 'crew are always right' stance. We're all individuals and as such have differing views of the situation.

What was intended by my comment regarding moderator comments, it was not regarding 'crew are always right' (far from it) but was on the topic of a moderator stating if crew dont like it they should just move on - I was merely highlighting the seniority system within the airline sector makes that very difficult to do and I naively believed a moderator would be aware of this, apologies if the quoted mod was not aware of it, below are snippets of the quotes I was trying to address.

RichardMannion (Mod) every job has it good points and its bad points. If you feel that the bad points outweigh the good points then maybe it's time to change employer or job.

mdvipond - if you come to dislike the terms, the pay or just the job in general, get the hell out and find terms/pay/a job that you do like. Don't inflict your disatisfaction upon us poor mugs (ie. your customers) with 'industrial action' just because you're unhappy with your lot.

mdvipond - you went into the job with your eyes open, did you not? You knew what the job entailed? You knew, more or less, how much you'd be paid for said job? Isn't it a bit late to start complaining that a notoriously (in relative terms) low paid job is - well - low paid?

Pete (Mod) - Surely this was all part of the job description when you joined? If not, then certainly you might have a case for arguing an appropriate increase, but it is not a valid argument for an incumbent in a job to state the job description they currently have is suddenly worth more than they had initially accepted without other reasons.

Jerseyboy - If you love your job but your employer does not reward you duly for all the duties you undertake then seek employment with a new employer in the same sector.

stuart101 - I am not totally defending the cabin crew, they did know the pay when they took on the job

I would love a pro managemnt individual to sign up as the 'Alternate Voice of reason' - though you would prefer 'Real voice of reason' does that perhaps indicate in which camp youe are seated ? [;)]

Best Regards

p.s. edited to add, sorry if my post came across as arrogant, not intentional, was just trying to be factual and stating my personal observations

[Decker]

Alternate would be better. Real would be a logical escalation in a potential flame war that you (perhaps) inadvertently created by positing your stance as the reasonable one. Your post was eloquent and cogently argued. I was taking issue with your choice of moniker. On fora where people can post about many subjects it is poor netiquette to avail oneself of a sobriquet which carries with it implicit superiority as it implies an attempt to attach a veracity to your postings that is relative not absolute.

I appreciate the crew are in an invidious position when it comes to 'moving on'. I have taken no public stance on this that I can recall but FWIW most of the crew here I'd happily see getting pay rises that brought them slightly above the external airline comparisons but regretfully these would also have to go to some of the lead swingers I've had the misfortune to fly with from time to time.

[RichardMannion]

Ahh, that's it the 'voice of reason' has spoken. Seen as you have called me out, let me take my moderator hat off for one second.

I am frankly amazed at the attitudes of certain crew that have responded, and looking at it now I can see why the service on some of my flights has been less than great.

I do regularly speak to VS senior management, and to say they don't care about their staff is simply not true. Have they offered pay increases in-line with inflation? Yes, and have they given it to all staff regardless of how they have performed in the past? That is what is so wrong. Most companies will give with one hand and take with another, in my world you have to consistently perform highly to progress and get a good increase, if you have an average year you get average. A salesperson will see his target continually increase, some of my boys have seen a 40% increase on their target but they don't turn round and demand a 40% increase. That's just the way it is. I asked the question, and no one has responded yet, what exactly are you after? If it is anything like 10%+, then forget it. If you want rate of inflation, and no change to benefits then that's a little different. VS are running a business, and it's a very tough market to be in. Latest sale fares for NYC are ~£210, so by the time you have removed the taxes and surcharges you are going to have a fare element of ~£70, so you can see straight away the margins are razor thin. WOuld you rather VS stretch themselves meeting your unions demands and ultiamtely fold down the line?

Not sure of the original intentions of the thread, as revealing inner company issues is not exactly great for the company (washing your dirty washing in public basically). If you guys were looking here for support and sympathy, then I think there is a way to do so, but don't expect everyone to welcome you with welcome arms. There are plenty of us that have run our own companies or are the people that have to do the great pay/reward appraisal routine for staff. Rule #1 is you can never please everyone, you will always have some that feel hard done by. I don't see the Res agents or IT teams talking about striking, (and if they are they are keeping quiet about it) - without them you guys wouldn't have passengers to look after as there would be no bookings.

I've sat and read some of the threads on cabincrew.com and PPRuNE, and seen some of the stances taken. I note that you too have called out the spend on stuff such as Clubhouses. Maybe you don't get the entire picture about running an airline, you have to continually invest and innovate to stay on top and attract customers. Without a flagship Clubhouse that marketing can use to lure lucrative premium passengers, loads go down and so do the yield, and ultimately everyone suffers (apart from the customers as they will go elsewhere).

The people I do feel sorry for are the crew that genuinely are very good and high performers, and they basically have to subsidise the low performers. In my line of work, like many others, perform badly and you get nothing (so ultimately a pay cut), perform average and you get average (which is normally rate of infaltion), perform like a star and then you will get properly rewarded.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for getting a fair deal but it's about fair and not holding someone to ransom. If it wasn't for a union, you guys wouldn't have a chance to try and get a fair deal but don't push it too far. Sometimes you just have to think about yourself, and what it actually means to you. If I accept what is on offer will I really be any worse off, or am I voting No because there is a 'whim' of maybe getting more because the union thinks they can hold the company to ransom. Not entirely sure how it works, but do you have to pay to be a member of the union? If it was me, I wouldn't bother and just demonstrate to management that I am good at what I do and get reward and recognition on the back of that, without having to rely on a 'group' to argue the toss for me and possibly jeopardise the future.

As to the seniority comment, and moving elsewhere, did you not know that when you became crew? I find it a bit hard to beleive as there are people that have posted to this thread that used to be crew, and left because they got a better package elsewhere.

I know a nubmer of you aren't going to like what has been said, but I think a 'reality check' is in order. Are you really going to be hard done by what is on offer? I know it's not the highest paid job in the world, but it's hardly the worst or least paid job either is it? The more you earn, the more you spend.

Thanks,
Richard

I am afraid that still the airline industry is living outside the real world.
These days people do NOT leave jobs and get seniority in similar jobs anymore, many have to take pay cuts to survive and be employed, that is the true situation where economics make moving jobs around the world so much easier.

The moderators have the right, the same as anyone posting here to have a view, the fact that many people look at the offer on the table and see that its a good one compared to many other offers going around.

I here that in some airlines a Purser can earn £60,000 and the junior cabin crew can earn up to £22,000, much better than many other jobs, look in your local papers and see how many pay £22,000 plus travelling the world.

All over the country people have had to work with reduced staffing levels, yet the Cabin crew don't want to wake up to the realities of modern day working?

Yes, Virgin have spent money on Clubhouses, and so they should. The passenger is what makes any airline and if you don't keep them happy, you don't have a job. Alongside if you don't like the job, leave goes, if you don't like the airline, there are many other choices.

I gather that many airlines are reducing staff, Globespan, Excel/TCD, TUI, BA at Gatwick, yet still Virgin Crew seem to think that they are not going to be affected?? Already rumours of less flights to orlando next year have risen on other forums.

To pay for such a large increase in basic pay will cost virgin something like £4 Million a year, where do you think the savings from this will come? or already higher than other airline fares contuinue to rise at the cost of passengers and flights and therefore cabin crew jobs?

Also, on other forums, Virgin CC are talking about wanting the strike to be at the satrt and at the end of the next school break, to give the most hurt to the passenger who this couold be their one and only major holiday of the year perhaps? Nice.

No-One 'wins' because of strike action, not the airline, not the strikers who never make up the lost money, and certainly not the passenger, who will spend their next holiday money with another airline, costing those strikers perhaps the final blow, redundancy.