European airlines go ballistic over French air traffic controller strike
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.
“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.
-
This post did not contain any content.
flights over rights ?
is that the deal now ?
-
“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.
From the article:
O'Leary said that of Ryanair’s 400 cancellations caused by the strike, “360, or 90 percent of those flights, would operate if the Commission protected the overflights as Spain, Italy and Greece do during air traffic control strikes.”“Von der Leyen and the Commission made a big song and dance during Brexit about: 'We must protect the single market, the single market is sacrosanct, nothing would be allowed to disrupt the single market,'” he said. “Unless you're a French air traffic controller and you can shut down the sky over France.”
From me:
I don't think it's unreasonable to require strike actions to not affect non french traffic. In wartime, air traffic control continues. Countries in conflict wills till communicate with air traffic control. It makes sense for it to be an apolitical system and strikes are effectively political.That needs to be balanced with the right to strike which is quite strong in France! Frances central location in Europe would affect quite a number of flights.
-
flights over rights ?
is that the deal now ?
Only during high season. Do the same at the end of January and you wouldn't hear about it.
-
Only during high season. Do the same at the end of January and you wouldn't hear about it.
Then why bother to strike then if it would be completely ineffectual ?
-
From the article:
O'Leary said that of Ryanair’s 400 cancellations caused by the strike, “360, or 90 percent of those flights, would operate if the Commission protected the overflights as Spain, Italy and Greece do during air traffic control strikes.”“Von der Leyen and the Commission made a big song and dance during Brexit about: 'We must protect the single market, the single market is sacrosanct, nothing would be allowed to disrupt the single market,'” he said. “Unless you're a French air traffic controller and you can shut down the sky over France.”
From me:
I don't think it's unreasonable to require strike actions to not affect non french traffic. In wartime, air traffic control continues. Countries in conflict wills till communicate with air traffic control. It makes sense for it to be an apolitical system and strikes are effectively political.That needs to be balanced with the right to strike which is quite strong in France! Frances central location in Europe would affect quite a number of flights.
People still work during war time. I dont think it is a fair comparison.
The goal of strikes is to leverage the only collective mean that workers have by deciding to lay down their work.
Nothing is keeping airlines from routing around France. It just costs a bit more money. And frankly it is rich that Ryan Air is complaining here. They are probably one of the strongest price gougers and co-responsible for people striking in all aspects of aviation.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Staffing shortages played a role in a near-collision between an easyJet plane and a private jet at the Bordeaux airport in December 2022, according to French investigators. They found that three controllers were working in the tower at the time of the incident instead of the six required by the duty roster.
This should be the key aspect here. If we elevate the ramblings of Ryan Air to become any basis of policy, we should prepare for it to become normal that people are being killed in plane crashes in France.
-
Then why bother to strike then if it would be completely ineffectual ?
My point is that French always strike when is really sucks. Summer, Christmas, etc. Because that's what "works".
You don't hear about protests and strikes during low seasons.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Wont somebody think of the profits
-
People still work during war time. I dont think it is a fair comparison.
The goal of strikes is to leverage the only collective mean that workers have by deciding to lay down their work.
Nothing is keeping airlines from routing around France. It just costs a bit more money. And frankly it is rich that Ryan Air is complaining here. They are probably one of the strongest price gougers and co-responsible for people striking in all aspects of aviation.
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.
-
People still work during war time. I dont think it is a fair comparison.
The goal of strikes is to leverage the only collective mean that workers have by deciding to lay down their work.
Nothing is keeping airlines from routing around France. It just costs a bit more money. And frankly it is rich that Ryan Air is complaining here. They are probably one of the strongest price gougers and co-responsible for people striking in all aspects of aviation.
People still work during war time. I dont think it is a fair comparison.
Airlines sometimes avoid a country at war. They decide if they do it or not. So it is not a relevant comparison at all.
Nothing is keeping airlines from routing around France. It just costs a bit more mone
....and it should be the normal thing to expect. Their complaining is ridiculous.
-
This post did not contain any content.
A company boss complaining about workers who strike.
Nothing really new here.
-
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, which incudes strikes, makes them subject to misinformation which can be deadly.
I don't get it. Do you mean that the air traffic controllers become subject to misinformation because they are allowed, or do you mean the passengers? Either way i disagree. Striking is a fundamental right. The alternative is for the problems of the workers not to get awareness. The article quotes a near miss in France, where the tower was severely understaffed. We saw multiple deadly instance in the US right after Trump put the axe to Air Traffic controllers in the US.
Not addressing these issues and not allowing controllers to use all means of workers to challenge problems and make them public, is leading to people being killed.
Also the airlines knew in advance and can just reroute around.
Even if they did and were responsible,it’s a reasonable point. Bad actors can make a good point and be right.
The airlines put price pressure on ground operations, which lead to bad practices, which lead to problems with safety. This makes all airlines responsible, but the ones heavily lobbying like RyanAir more so than others.
-
Making air traffic control.subject to politics, which incudes strikes, makes them subject to misinformation which can be deadly.
I don't get it. Do you mean that the air traffic controllers become subject to misinformation because they are allowed, or do you mean the passengers? Either way i disagree. Striking is a fundamental right. The alternative is for the problems of the workers not to get awareness. The article quotes a near miss in France, where the tower was severely understaffed. We saw multiple deadly instance in the US right after Trump put the axe to Air Traffic controllers in the US.
Not addressing these issues and not allowing controllers to use all means of workers to challenge problems and make them public, is leading to people being killed.
Also the airlines knew in advance and can just reroute around.
Even if they did and were responsible,it’s a reasonable point. Bad actors can make a good point and be right.
The airlines put price pressure on ground operations, which lead to bad practices, which lead to problems with safety. This makes all airlines responsible, but the ones heavily lobbying like RyanAir more so than others.
If air traffic control is political, airplanes travel into territory and get purposely crashed. That's the point of keeping it apolititical and has been through many wars.
If Russia wanted to crash European planes, they could quickly pretend to be Ukrainian air traffic control. It's all based on trust. We shouldn't mess with that trust.
-
If air traffic control is political, airplanes travel into territory and get purposely crashed. That's the point of keeping it apolititical and has been through many wars.
If Russia wanted to crash European planes, they could quickly pretend to be Ukrainian air traffic control. It's all based on trust. We shouldn't mess with that trust.
Equating the right to strike with purposely crashing planes has to be the most absurd anti worker rights take i have heard in a long while.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
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).
-
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.
Striking workers, you call it "politics", but it is not the same kind of politics as when the EU makes secret deals with Ryanair for example.
It is a very different kind, and no reasonable comparison.
-
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).
anyone complaining about strikes should be immediately excluded from society, unable to get rewarded
But in reality, such people get new fancy boss positions
-
My point is that French always strike when is really sucks. Summer, Christmas, etc. Because that's what "works".
You don't hear about protests and strikes during low seasons.
The French know how to do it
