European airlines go ballistic over French air traffic controller strike
-
“It is indefensible that today that I'm canceling flights from Ireland to Italy, from Germany to Spain, from Portugal to Poland,” O'Leary said.
The budget airline chief blamed the European Union, and specifically European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, for the situation.
looks puzzled
Is the European Commission responsible for mediating union disputes?
The strike, which took place on Thursday and Friday, was over disputes between two unions and the French directorate general for civil aviation
I mean, this sounds like it's between the French government and French unions.
I mean, this sounds like it's between the French government and French unions
If it's causing issues with flights in other countries, which it sounds like it is, then it is the EU's business...but ideally, they'd just pressure the French government to cave to the unions' demands. Fat chance though, lol
-
Our attitude should be that anyone complaining about strikes should be immediately excluded from society, unable to get rewarded or get a new fancy job & forced to start the career over.
Basically what we (apparently) do to people protesting against funding genocides & climate change we should be doing to people oppressing workers bcs they want profits to be higher.
Just deal with the strike, make it work without a stick or accept your business isn't viable (or at least not with you in it).
There are ways to strike which are better than others. In some countries they simply don't collect fares, so the user is not hindered, but the cost of a strike is still felt by the employer. Maybe this doesn't work for air travel, but it works for other services.
-
There are ways to strike which are better than others. In some countries they simply don't collect fares, so the user is not hindered, but the cost of a strike is still felt by the employer. Maybe this doesn't work for air travel, but it works for other services.
wrote last edited by [email protected]There are rules (strict laws with fines & prison time) to strikes depending on sectors.
Eg basic infrastructure workers (doctors, bus drivers, etc) can't strike by not working, which I think you were referring from. I think that does makes sense otherwise innocent people can die or really suffer.
But where public's lives aren't at stake, the users sold def feel the strike & know what the company they are financially supporting doesn't wasn't to do.
But laws too can get very corrupt very quickly, eg USA presidents totally outlawing strikes on sector or per company basis (bcs pocket monies).
-
There are rules (strict laws with fines & prison time) to strikes depending on sectors.
Eg basic infrastructure workers (doctors, bus drivers, etc) can't strike by not working, which I think you were referring from. I think that does makes sense otherwise innocent people can die or really suffer.
But where public's lives aren't at stake, the users sold def feel the strike & know what the company they are financially supporting doesn't wasn't to do.
But laws too can get very corrupt very quickly, eg USA presidents totally outlawing strikes on sector or per company basis (bcs pocket monies).
wrote last edited by [email protected]But why should the user feel the strike, what is the use in that? The strike is against the employer, not the user. It happens to hinder the user as a side effect, but ideally you'd have fare strikes that only hurt the company and not the users.
PS: ok, if it is to show users how useful you are to them (but that is just an indirect way to pressure employers), besides, that could just be used as an excuse for the employer to raise the fares in order to pay workers (and management) more.
-
There are rules (strict laws with fines & prison time) to strikes depending on sectors.
Eg basic infrastructure workers (doctors, bus drivers, etc) can't strike by not working, which I think you were referring from. I think that does makes sense otherwise innocent people can die or really suffer.
But where public's lives aren't at stake, the users sold def feel the strike & know what the company they are financially supporting doesn't wasn't to do.
But laws too can get very corrupt very quickly, eg USA presidents totally outlawing strikes on sector or per company basis (bcs pocket monies).
Eg basic infrastructure workers (workers, bus drivers, etc)
Bus drivers strike all the time.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Fuck the airlines. No mercy.
-
Eg basic infrastructure workers (workers, bus drivers, etc)
Bus drivers strike all the time.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yes, but usually they do it by other means as to not driving the bus (or they don't drive the buses only for a limited time within the strike).
But countries differ a lot in regards what is basic infrastructure.
(Lol, typo, I meant doctors there, fixed.)
-
But why should the user feel the strike, what is the use in that? The strike is against the employer, not the user. It happens to hinder the user as a side effect, but ideally you'd have fare strikes that only hurt the company and not the users.
PS: ok, if it is to show users how useful you are to them (but that is just an indirect way to pressure employers), besides, that could just be used as an excuse for the employer to raise the fares in order to pay workers (and management) more.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I absolutely want to know where I shop & who I vote for with my wallet (make profit for).
If that company is shitty to workers I'll def try to avoid it.
Worker rights endeavours arent something to hide & dilute.
And yes, the employer needs to take into account customer view too (which they do).
-
Yes, but usually they do it by other means as to not driving the bus (or they don't drive the buses only for a limited time within the strike).
But countries differ a lot in regards what is basic infrastructure.
(Lol, typo, I meant doctors there, fixed.)
wrote last edited by [email protected]Nah, they properly strike. The transporation company might try to get some replacements and shift around bus drivers that aren't striking, but it usually means no or greatly reduced service.
-
Yes but you have to balance passenger safety. Making air traffic control.subject to politics, which incudes strikes, makes them subject to misinformation which can be deadly. Airline passengers should not be pawns.
Flyover operating is a reasonable compromise. Ryanair have cut airfares, which depends on cheap staff and cheap destination airports. However, I don't think they've ever had a fatal crash.
If you think France striking is due to Ryanair, who operate there but not hugely, then lol. Even if they did and were responsible,it's a reasonable point. Bad actors can make a good point and be right. Your goalpost shifting is quite clear.
Making air traffic control.subject to politics
Every part of your life is subject to politics. Always has been.
-
Nah, they properly strike. The transporation company might try to get some replacements and shift around bus drivers that aren't striking, but it usually means no or greatly reduced service.
Yes, I know, in my county too.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Kevin has been angry about this for a while, here's March 2023: https://corporate.ryanair.com/news/ryanair-launches-eu-passenger-petition/
-
Making air traffic control.subject to politics
Every part of your life is subject to politics. Always has been.
Yep, I agree. Yet some things can be kept apolitical when there's a will to do so.
