So - you surrounded your camaflagoued vindication of TG in Points 3 & 4 with Window Dressing, Hyperbole & Conjecture.Thanks Tobo - you priceless, priceless Chump
Not in shouting font though, if you want to converse normally the Tobster is well ready, a chara
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2015
- Threads
- 3
- Messages
- 3,074
- Likes
- 3,527
Ill agree with this. I can recall a few years ago clicking around on the Aer Lingus Web Site without being able to book the flight I wanted. After several attempts clicking here and there always ending up in the same wrong place with lots of cursing I gave up and booked Ryanair with a couple of clicks and then gave up even attempting to fly Aer Lingus for a couple of years after that.
Since then they have re-done their Web Site it and Ive had no such problems in recent times.
Since then they have re-done their Web Site it and Ive had no such problems in recent times.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2016
- Threads
- 1,260
- Messages
- 32,889
- Likes
- 31,940
Let's look at each of those in turn.
1. How do you reduce your input costs on an airline? Well, you have very little % control over fuel prices, or landing fees. The only way you can reduce unit cost is by reducing labour cost. And how did Aer Lingus reduce labour cost? Why only by replacing well paid Native Irish workers with cheap immigrant labour.
2. How do you reduce cabin crew numbers? Cabin crew numbers are dictated by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), not by Aer Lingus. Reworked its schedule? You mean it cut out routes that might have been needed by the Irish nation, but were not so profitable? It may have stopped landing at Shannon, so now the state puts us all at risk by renting out Shannon to the Septics for bombing Iraq and other Muslim countries. Well, this may indeed reduce costs for Aer Lingus, but certainly not for the previous owners of Aer Lingus, i.e. the Irish people.
3. In short, got rid of well paid Native Irish workers and replaced them with cheap immigrant labour.
4. In other words, work the immigrants like blacks.
5. By becoming part of a multinational corporation rather than a national airline, one might indeed get cheaper deals on certain items. But, of course, a multinational like IAG has no loyalty to Ireland or the Irish people, and will completely drop us if they find it more profitable to do so. Here we must consider the risk cost of not having a national airline. The cost to the Irish customer is potentially having to deal with aliens in a foreign land who know nothing about us - and care even less.
6. It seems you are including Ireland as part of the UK. And perhaps IAG agrees with you. So the cost to us is that our sovereignty is completely disregarded and flouted. Sub-contracting out Irish flights to a third party leaves that third party even more free to replace Native Irish labour with cheap immigrant labour.
7. National airlines are also able to use the internet, so we may take it that had Aer Lingus remained an Irish national asset, we could still book tickets by internet.
8. So it sub contracts its maintenance to third party companies - who are free to hire as much cheap immigrant labour as they want.
9. Aer Lingus completely owned its head office. It was not paying rent for it. Besides that, a state company can just as easily move its HQ as a private company. I would say that moving address was used as an excuse to remove Irish staff and replace them with cheap immigrant labour.
10. The main way they reduced handling costs at airports was by replacing Irish workers with cheap foreign labour.
1. How do you reduce your input costs on an airline? Well, you have very little % control over fuel prices, or landing fees. The only way you can reduce unit cost is by reducing labour cost. And how did Aer Lingus reduce labour cost? Why only by replacing well paid Native Irish workers with cheap immigrant labour.
2. How do you reduce cabin crew numbers? Cabin crew numbers are dictated by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), not by Aer Lingus. Reworked its schedule? You mean it cut out routes that might have been needed by the Irish nation, but were not so profitable? It may have stopped landing at Shannon, so now the state puts us all at risk by renting out Shannon to the Septics for bombing Iraq and other Muslim countries. Well, this may indeed reduce costs for Aer Lingus, but certainly not for the previous owners of Aer Lingus, i.e. the Irish people.
3. In short, got rid of well paid Native Irish workers and replaced them with cheap immigrant labour.
4. In other words, work the immigrants like blacks.
5. By becoming part of a multinational corporation rather than a national airline, one might indeed get cheaper deals on certain items. But, of course, a multinational like IAG has no loyalty to Ireland or the Irish people, and will completely drop us if they find it more profitable to do so. Here we must consider the risk cost of not having a national airline. The cost to the Irish customer is potentially having to deal with aliens in a foreign land who know nothing about us - and care even less.
6. It seems you are including Ireland as part of the UK. And perhaps IAG agrees with you. So the cost to us is that our sovereignty is completely disregarded and flouted. Sub-contracting out Irish flights to a third party leaves that third party even more free to replace Native Irish labour with cheap immigrant labour.
7. National airlines are also able to use the internet, so we may take it that had Aer Lingus remained an Irish national asset, we could still book tickets by internet.
8. So it sub contracts its maintenance to third party companies - who are free to hire as much cheap immigrant labour as they want.
9. Aer Lingus completely owned its head office. It was not paying rent for it. Besides that, a state company can just as easily move its HQ as a private company. I would say that moving address was used as an excuse to remove Irish staff and replace them with cheap immigrant labour.
10. The main way they reduced handling costs at airports was by replacing Irish workers with cheap foreign labour.
Last edited:
input costs? Wtf are you on about Champ.
You have a lot of control over fuel cost by hedging and adopting proper fuel management procedures.
cabin crew numbers- dependent on the number of exits on an aircraft.
With the knocking out of Premier Class service on all but T/A services this was achieved.
National Airlines are history, Champ, what slate have you been lurking under.
Regarding Maintenance, why would you maintain your fleet at home, with huge cost rather that fly your machines to a station which does the job better and cheaper.
The rest of your diatribe is just rubbish.
Quite frankly Champ what you want is a little communistic set up which ignores competition and
just ignores reality.
You couldn’t run a fcuking sweatshop with your attitude,Champ.
You have a lot of control over fuel cost by hedging and adopting proper fuel management procedures.
cabin crew numbers- dependent on the number of exits on an aircraft.
With the knocking out of Premier Class service on all but T/A services this was achieved.
National Airlines are history, Champ, what slate have you been lurking under.
Regarding Maintenance, why would you maintain your fleet at home, with huge cost rather that fly your machines to a station which does the job better and cheaper.
The rest of your diatribe is just rubbish.
Quite frankly Champ what you want is a little communistic set up which ignores competition and
just ignores reality.
You couldn’t run a fcuking sweatshop with your attitude,Champ.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2016
- Threads
- 1,260
- Messages
- 32,889
- Likes
- 31,940
And national companies do that also. Do you think that Aer Lingus never heard of hedging before it was privatized? That would be rather strange - given that it was sold to the same management team that it had when it was the national airline. If they were so incompetent as to not know about hedging before 2006, why do you think they same people would suddenly become competent after that? In reality, Aer Lingus always hedged its fuel costs, but hedging is not nearly as effective as you'd imagine. You can often end up actually paying more if the futures price goes against you - and it often will.