Pilot shortage at Brussels Airlines ?

Corto · Post by **Corto** » 04 Aug 2007, 15:49

fly wrote:Corto,.....respect ......

Ok, you're right....But some propaganda style of posts tend to stiffen my spine.

tolipanebas · Post by **tolipanebas** » 04 Aug 2007, 15:52

LX-LGX wrote:If showing respect for your employer and those who have invested some millions in your company is 19th century tradition and not done in your modern era, I take that as a compliment.

Oh come on, you must be the last one in Belgium to still think those few miserable milions from the start up phase should earn our shareholders ever lasting gratitude...

Don’t get me wrong, what our shareholders have done during the first year after the bankruptcy of Sabena was great and they should rightfully be thanked for doing that (and they were, just read this forum over), but let’s face it, their ‘commitment’ to the company is long over.

As the years past, no new investment was done in SN and so the company became the cash strapped walking deadman it is now, forced to finance everything from its cash flow only, a method of working which is unsustainable for long, and for which the same share holders are now only to be bashed: if they don’t want to invest, then let them make room for others who want to, rather than hold on to their shares (in the hope they can sell them on for the best possible price thanks to a miracle)

LX-LGX wrote: Brussels Airlines' operational profit is less then 1%. Will it improve if they give pilots 30% pay rise? No, my dear Corti: it will mean the end of the pilot shortage, but also the end of the company. In case you don't know: most shareholders are banks, and they are not afraid to write off a wrong investment.

ROTFL

The exceptionally thin margin at SN is proof of how poorly managed this company is, since it has one of the lowest (crew) operating costs in the industry and should thus be best placed to post great results!

The lack of impact of pilot pay on the profitability of a well managed airline will be clear when you compare results of reputated and highly profitable airlines like LH, AF, FR etc to the pay they offer their flight crews…

If they can afford it, then why shouldn’t SN be able to do so? Indeed, because SN isn’t doing such a great job commercially –despite what you are constantly trying to make us believe- and the reason for that lays with its inefficient and costly overhead structure, its bad product strategy, its totally unsuitable fleet composition, its unbalanced route network etc etc…

If SN would get its act together, they would be booking 10% profit margins easily and they would not have a problem paying their crews normal salaries, but as the company demonstrates year after year, it is inherently incapable of running a good show and so the staff has to pay the price for this managerial incompetence.

LX-LGX wrote: Pilots are the best paid group within Brussels Airlines. If you call their salary peanuts resulting in monkeys, what kind of animals are all other employees then?.

What is important is not what you think is a fair salary for a function, but what is the ‘normal’ salary for a function. I dare to say I am pretty sure call centre agents at SN for instance get paid competitive salaries to their colleagues at other call centres in Belgium… Same for secretaries at the offices, HR managers etc etc…
Then why do you think it is justifiable to single out one group of employees and clearly deny them competitive pay? Because of the high nominal value of their salary? Sorry to say, but if a company can not afford to pay ALL its staff competitive pay, then they are proving to be an uncompetitive company itself…

Vinnie-Winnie · Post by **Vinnie-Winnie** » 04 Aug 2007, 16:21

Well thing is though no-one has been able to create a successful airline based in Brussels!

Even Virgin with its comparatively small cost base failed to be profitable enough to be a stand alone company!

And as far as I have understood they weren't very charitable with what they paid their employees as well!

Bottom line is that with either poorly paid or well paid pilots there is no hope!

Let foreign carriers employing Belgian pilots serve BRU as they deem suitable! They can pick and mix point to point passengers and connecting passengers going all over the world as they wish and create the appropriate pricing structure!

Bru air just cannot do that effectively! Pick a route say Brussels to Frankfurt and you will see that the advantage of Lufthansa is clear: Can rely on loyal German customers ( far more numerous than the equivalent Belgian customers fro BRu air), can offer connecting destinations for Belgians that Bru air just cannot do with Germans, and if it feels the threat of Bru air can lower its prices to match BRU air prices and in the short, medium run drive Bru air out of the market. it is also about financial muscles...

So Sn Bru pilots, I'd really advise you to flee the company cause there is no hope! Wages will never be as high, and yes Belgium has probably one of the best quality of life but yeah there are trade offs to be made! And a career to think off...

Wish people would stop dreaming about a big successful national carrier... It will just not happen full stop!

tolipanebas · Post by **tolipanebas** » 04 Aug 2007, 18:13

It is now official:

As from September 17th, Brussels Airlines will wet-lease at least one BAe146-200 from flightline to cope with the urgent lack of crew till at least the rest of the year!!!

At the same time they will have to ground a minimum of 2 of their own BAe146s, not only causing a serious cost explosion for the company but also many schedule disruptions (cancelled flights)...

The first consequences of the briliant HR policies at SN are begining to show... wonder how much planes they will have grounded by the end of this year? Word has it SN is already negociating further wet-leases....

Corto · Post by **Corto** » 04 Aug 2007, 22:41

Unless I missed something in the organisations of companies in Belgium, Human Resources do not make policies, they just manage personnel according to policies implemented by the executive of the company. Consequently, I guess the accountability would have to be requested from somewhere between HR and the Board of Directors......Mr. D. perhaps?

FLY4HOURS.BE · Post by **FLY4HOURS.BE** » 06 Aug 2007, 11:08

I can't believe this happening... Not only do they ground their Bae's, no they lease more!!!

If at least they had wet-leased a few A318's...

I spoke to a few ex-VEX pilots and they said they were quite happy when still under VEX...

Greets

TCAS_climb · Post by **TCAS_climb** » 06 Aug 2007, 11:50

How about firing everybody, wet-leasing half of Ryanair's fleet and start making money ?

Seriously, a 6-month internship at Southwest Airlines wouldn't hurt. I don't see any better company to learn the interest of fostering a great company spirit.

If they can't even afford it, there are entire books on the magic Southwest recipe.

FlyA330 · Post by **FlyA330** » 06 Aug 2007, 14:47

I think BruAir has an identity problem.
They fly B.Light and B.Flex on most European flights but some of them are still Eco and Business.
Then they do summer charters with the A330 and a wet lease for Hewa Bora.
They want to be one company but still flying with 2 AOC's.
They fly low-cost but with a company structure which is not suitable for it...
No wonder they don't know it anymore

jan_olieslagers · Post by **jan_olieslagers** » 06 Aug 2007, 14:55

FlyA330 wrote:I think BruAir has an identity problem.

Yes, that's my understanding too. I'd go one step further*: even if there is some idea of "what should be done to make this a solid profitable airline", and I have my doubts there, but then surely there's no money to implement the idea. So they just go on making what money they can with the present people and equipment. Equipment they can control, but people come and go, yes they do...

*this phrasing copyright Mssrs Dupond & Dupont aka Jansen & Janssen..

zooloflyer · Post by **zooloflyer** » 08 Aug 2007, 11:13

I like opinions and discussions very much.
I like freedom of speech very much.

Unfortunately, this topic proves that there is nothing more pathetic than people throwing around their frustrations (or even confidential information) onto a wide open forum.

On top, things will ABSOLUTELY NOT change by these posts - there are certainly more efficient and constructive means.

Greets!

BTW I also work for the company with its pro's and contra's, it's happy days and less happy days - but I guess a basic level of loyaulty could be respected,even on public forums.

ERICAIRLINES · Post by **ERICAIRLINES** » 08 Aug 2007, 11:49

Confidential news??And the freedom of the press??
B flex and B light structure is a total disaster....or you become a 'real low cost 'company...or you remain a 'full services' one..but choosing to do a bit of both,is really not the good option..
Bru and CRL are now full of low cost operators...Bru air should choose another commercial strategy...the size of the company is also,or too small or too big...
Bru air did not go as far as Aer Lingus did...or too far ...Bru air does not find his space in the aviation world...
Still a bit too expensive(to say the least)for 'savings sensitive pax'...and not a real full services airline anymore,with Business class for Corporate customers...(see the termination of lot of codeshares for this very reason).
Even more complicated the fact that on HEL,MOW and TLV they keep the old business model...
They should rethink their commercial strategy,before it is once again too late for a belgian flag carrier to become a profitable one,with a performing network,anda good pricing strategy,catering to all type of customers (leisure,vfr,business).
Try to become a 100 pct internet booking airline like easyjet or FR.
No more call centers,sitel things,oversized services,prestigeous offices...
More sales forces on the field...

Vinnie-Winnie · Post by **Vinnie-Winnie** » 08 Aug 2007, 12:03

FLY4HOURS.BE wrote:I can't believe this happening... Not only do they ground their Bae's, no they lease more!!!

If at least they had wet-leased a few A318's...

I spoke to a few ex-VEX pilots and they said they were quite happy when still under VEX...

Greets

And what would a A318 bring more to Brussels Airlines exactly? Anyway don't think there are any available on the market! Didn't you mean A319 by any chance?

Bottom line is the company has big problems! It is too soon to judge the concept they introduced recently but crew shortages are becoming real, which doesn't bode well for the future of the company! Aircrafts are getting older as well and suffer for some from big reliability issues! Doesn't change the fact that with the limited amount of money available they are doing a pretty good job! It is called constrained optimisation!

When they decided to change identity I am sure they gave it a longer thought than everybody here on the forum so I don't think it is appropriate to judge their decision right now! I'm sure they employed marketing and transport consultant which are far more knowledgeable than the average 17 year old boy on this forum!

And as I said before if pilots are not happy they can leave! If anyone was a pilot here wouldn't he consider moving 1h25 away from here to get double the wages? I think everyone would...

teddybAIR · Post by **teddybAIR** » 08 Aug 2007, 13:32

tolipanebas wrote:

As the years past, no new investment was done in SN and so the company became the cash strapped walking deadman it is now, forced to finance everything from its cash flow only, a method of working which is unsustainable for long, and for which the same share holders are now only to be bashed: if they don’t want to invest, then let them make room for others who want to, rather than hold on to their shares (in the hope they can sell them on for the best possible price thanks to a miracle)

Funny, my opinion - but hey, that is just my opinion - is that generic growth (growth generated by investing the money a company earns in a fiscal year to boost revenues in future fiscal years) is the essence of economy and one of only a very limited number of ways to truly create added value. Whether that added value is then attributed to shareholders, customers, employees,etc. is another discussion. But I must say I disagree with your statement that "financing everything from your own cash flow only is a method of working which is unsustainable for long".
For one simple reason: I work day in, day out and am able to save a little money, which I partly invest on the stock exchange. Well a company that is not able to invest at least part of the money it needs from the profits from previous years, is just not worth of getting my hard urned savings. I rather invest in a company that gives me confidence. If it can only survive by means of "capital increases" (kapitaalsverhogingen), well, just shut the damn factory because it only destroys value (for shareholders, customers, suppliers,...)

I agree with the rest though

tolipanebas · Post by **tolipanebas** » 08 Aug 2007, 14:09

teddybAIR wrote:
tolipanebas wrote: As the years past, no new investment was done in SN and so the company became the cash strapped walking deadman it is now, forced to finance everything from its cash flow only, a method of working which is unsustainable for long, and for which the same share holders are now only to be bashed: if they don’t want to invest, then let them make room for others who want to, rather than hold on to their shares (in the hope they can sell them on for the best possible price thanks to a miracle)
Funny, my opinion - but hey, that is just my opinion - is that generic growth (growth generated by investing the money a company earns in a fiscal year to boost revenues in future fiscal years) is the essence of economy and one of only a very limited number of ways to truly create added value. Whether that added value is then attributed to shareholders, customers, employees,etc. is another discussion. But I must say I disagree with your statement that "financing everything from your own cash flow only is a method of working which is unsustainable for long".
For one simple reason: I work day in, day out and am able to save a little money, which I partly invest on the stock exchange. Well a company that is not able to invest at least part of the money it needs from the profits from previous years, is just not worth of getting my hard urned savings. I rather invest in a company that gives me confidence. If it can only survive by means of "capital increases" (kapitaalsverhogingen), well, just shut the damn factory because it only destroys value (for shareholders, customers, suppliers,...)

I agree with the rest though

I think you have missed the essence of what I ment to say there:

my point is not like you seem to have understood that it would be BAD to finance new investments from cash flow, my point is that SN has such a small operating cash flow it can only make small investments because of the policy of its shareholders not to be willing to increase the capital!

The best example is Africa: for years SN has been saying this is their bread and butter, yet they do not have the operating cash flow to buy or lease a few factory new A330s to expand on the continent, and since the shareholders don't want to invest any further in the company either, the airline is forced to skim the world entire for a cheap (and dearly used) second hand A330, as it is the only kind of expantion it can pay for from its current cash flow...

Thanks for agreeing with the rest (and I am sure also the above now I clarified it).

----------

BTW- to come back to the wet lease of a flightline BAe146:

It'll be interesting to see how much impact this will have on the operating result of SN for this year.
So far, SN booked about 4M euro profit over roughly the first half of the year (5 months to be precise). Given the second half is traditionally better, it iss a safe bet to say a result anywhere between 12M and 13M would have been easily achievable. However, knowing the going rates for wet leases in the industry nowadays, the decision to lease a BAE146 during the last 3 months of the year may knock off at least a million from that!

And if rumours are correct and a second wet lease is considered (thus meaning 2 wet leases for next year!!!), I leave it to you all to estimate the impact on the result if this drags on for long...

teddybAIR · Post by **teddybAIR** » 08 Aug 2007, 14:37

Vinnie-Winnie wrote: And as I said before if pilots are not happy they can leave! If anyone was a pilot here wouldn't he consider moving 1h25 away from here to get double the wages? I think everyone would...

Amen to that!

And let's face it: with the resources available and except for the HR problems Brussels Airlines is having now, they are not doint a bad job at all, if you put things into perspective. Just don't go dreaming about a leading Belgian airline, just because you are all aviation fanatics! I'm proudly Belgian, aviation fanatic, loved the Sabena ere, wished all the best to VEX and SN, now to Bru.Air, but let's face it: aviation is a tough world and it will be a slow climb out of the valley. Any growth of BA will be slow and weak to protect, but let's just wish them all the best AND...be loyal! Yes, you're reading it right: be loyal! I hear lot's of you people posting in other threads that they are flying LCC's, well if you truly like Bru.Air and you are not flying them, they have a loyalty problem...help them!

flyavro · Post by **flyavro** » 13 Aug 2007, 09:31

1 more confirmed FO leaving for hong kong last week and at least 2 going to a simcheck somewhere so we'll know their results in about a week from now.

Heard the name of an Airbus capt/instructor but not confirmed yet, I'll go check it out.

Management swears by their solution to solve this minor problem: get the government to lower the pilot's taxes.
I fear I'm a bit sceptical about this: why would they do that? And I know some people who would be very vocal against this rule because if they allow that for us why not for a lot of other jobs (although there are some reasons why it would be possible...)

And the show goes on.

teddybAIR · Post by **teddybAIR** » 13 Aug 2007, 10:46

flyavro wrote:Management swears by their solution to solve this minor problem: get the government to lower the pilot's taxes.

With all due respect, even the smallest kid can come up with that solution. I'm having a hard time to believe that BA management doesn't have a "plan B" should the governement (and I assess this scenario as most likely as well as most desirable) reject this request to lower taxes. That's not what I call tackling a problem, that's transferring the responsibility. They should have an alternative where they take actions with a long term perspective on sustainability. I mean: it's business for God's sake!

Best regards,
Tom

fcw · Post by **fcw** » 13 Aug 2007, 10:55

flyavro wrote: Management swears by their solution to solve this minor problem: get the government to lower the pilot's taxes

Did you hear them saying LOWERING? I heard them saying: REDUCING the DIFFERENCE.
As some people at Val Duchesse are desperately looking for money, taxing the belgian residents flying abroad more could be an unexpected outcome.

FLY4HOURS.BE · Post by **FLY4HOURS.BE** » 13 Aug 2007, 12:47

And what would a A318 bring more to Brussels Airlines exactly? Anyway don't think there are any available on the market! Didn't you mean A319 by any chance?

The A318 is still bigger than any AVRO and way more efficient.
It is cheaper to lease than an A319, and what good is an A319 if they can t even fill an AVRO?
I know a Turkish operator ready to wet-lease some but I m not sure about the price... should be less than any AVRO anyway.

Airbus330lover · Post by **Airbus330lover** » 13 Aug 2007, 13:39

FLY4HOURS.BE wrote:
And what would a A318 bring more to Brussels Airlines exactly? Anyway don't think there are any available on the market! Didn't you mean A319 by any chance?
The A318 is still bigger than any AVRO and way more efficient.
It is cheaper to lease than an A319, and what good is an A319 if they can t even fill an AVRO?
I know a Turkish operator ready to wet-lease some but I m not sure about the price... should be less than any AVRO anyway.

Not sure
Leasing price for the AVROS seems to be low (don't forget, the lease contract are perhaps the contrats signed end 2001 or 1Q2002!)
And.... production of A318 is very low too.
Not so easy to find specially if you need 10 planes..