Ryanair sues France over work law

…………….
Its interesting to hear Europeans complain that the French are sheltering Air France from competition, as if BA, Lufthansa, and Alitalia aren’t similarly shielded (though often in different or hidden ways)…………

You are of course correct on Alitalia, but BA and LH, no.
There is no evidence what-so-ever to suspect BA or Lufthansa being protected.

So far in France, several indigenous airlines have mysteriously been shutdown by court injunctions and sudden decisions by banks to foreclose on loans.

In Italy, the government has ordered all external airlines flying to Italy to match Alitalia ticket prices.
Also, there are very few airlines other than Alitalia in Italy, and by all accounts it has the monopoly.

However, in Germany and the UK there are a plethora of airlines, competing successfully against BA and LH. There is no evidence to suggest they are being impeded in any way.

The “sunday thing” is basically still going on. We had a debate a few years back for the same reason in this country.

Let me set this straight first. It’s totally wrong to say that the gov “doesn’t want”..

Actually the law tells us that a mall or supermarket needs a special permit in order to open on Sunday.

Most of the time the Unions are lobbying in order to make this NOT happen.

I’m not really for stores to open on Sunday , but if some people volunteer to do it , why not.

As for Avs B ……….. :diablo: I guess that we debated hours about this , and nothing positive came from it, so , I pass.

IIRC, Richard Branson had a similar problem 10-12 yrs ago when I was working TDY in France. He wanted to have his store open on Sunday afternoon, most of his staff was young/single/students who wanted to work, but the French Government said no. Store couldn’t open on Sunday as that was family time. Now France is 20% Muslim, the government and upper class are essentially agnostic/atheistic, and no one recalls that the history of Sunday off has it’s roots in Christian culture.

Its interesting to hear Europeans complain that the French are sheltering Air France from competition, as if BA, Lufthansa, and Alitalia aren’t similarly shielded (though often in different or hidden ways).

Once one starts down the protectionist line, where do you stop? We are all free-market capitalists when we’re customers, but socialists at work (“dont come after my job.”)

I’m a U. S. citizen, and illegal immigrants from Mexico now outnumber African-Americans in our country. At the same time, major corporations continue outsourcing at alarming rates. The middle class is getting squeezed to a frightening extent from both sides.

And I haven’t even addressed the A versus B controversy. To my mind A is an arm of the government, protected from failure, who builds airplanes so they can hire people. B only hires people because they must build airplanes. Not content to obtain government support from European governments, A now almost demands the KC-X contract, with their lawsuit against Canada for not buying another of their products as a backdrop. Meanwhile, they insist they will have huge U.S. content as a statement of largesse, when the reality is that the falling U.S. dollar (due to the previously mentioned squeeze and deficit spending) make it in A’s best interest to manufacture as much as possible in the lower cost (versus western Europe) U.S.

I do however stick to my suspicions of the French Government over protecting AF.

And you are damm right 🙂

I stand corrected and more enlightened on the labour law issue.

I do however stick to my suspicions of the French Government over protecting AF.

So what of the rule that when onboard an aircraft, you are subject to the laws of the country in which that aircraft is registered?
FR’s aircraft are registered in Ireland, therefore when on board you are subject to Irish law, including working laws.

This has been a recognised rule for decades. France is spitting on it for its own ends.

Sandy , you can’t say that. If it was true, we would have to face the same shameful situation than the one we have in the commercial sea transportation:
under paid slave manpower hired in low wages countries…..

Well I couldn’t agree more with Sky on this.
If one wants to operate from a foreign operation base is to obey the local rules.

It is true for Airline business but also true for everything else. We had many scandals in the past few month of “slaves of the liberalism” earning minimum wages from Eastern Countries but having to pay for their lodging/food etc… in France.

However, Sandy is correct to mention the highly suspicious protectionism imposed by AF with the complicity of the French Gov since many years (decades actually).

Let me remind you that France is the ONLY big country in Europe where no real competition is fighting AF monopoly (but the High Speed Train).

Happy new year to everyone BTW.

The only way i could support FR in this would be a class action on behalf of employees, but it obviously is not that. Yet i get the feeling FRs PR machine is trying to tone it to make people think it is some form of class action to benefit its employees!

So what of the rule that when onboard an aircraft, you are subject to the laws of the country in which that aircraft is registered? FR’s aircraft are registered in Ireland, therefore when on board you are subject to Irish law, including working laws.

You’re spewing the irrelevent same clap-trap as O’Leary. Firstly, crew work does not start or finish on board an aeroplane. Next, if local labour laws are more restrictive – say in terms of total working time, or time between breaks, or days off – than the flight time limitation (FTL) scheme under which the aeroplane is operated, there is nothing in that FTL scheme that says that it over-rides labour laws. Nor indeed do things like minimum wages, sickness pay, vacation, pensions, maternity leave, etc., have anything to do with the any country’s flight time limitation scheme (work rules) associated with actually operating an aeroplane.

Andy

The French are a law unto themselves.
If it suited them better, then Irish law would prevail.
Just ask the poor Accor Hotel group staff in Poland.
Another French colony methinks.

So what of the rule that when onboard an aircraft, you are subject to the laws of the country in which that aircraft is registered?
FR’s aircraft are registered in Ireland, therefore when on board you are subject to Irish law, including working laws.

This has been a recognised rule for decades. France is spitting on it for its own ends.

I can just see it now… [for example] McDonalds in the UK suddely becomes “McDonalds Europe” based in Latvia, and all the burger flippers in the UK are told they’re going to be paid not the UK minimum wage, but the 43p an hour (or whatever it is) minimum wage in Latvia. There’s also nolonger a requirement to give their staff four weeks holiday a year, etc., etc. Fair? No – I didn’t think so.

I’m no socialist (far from it in fact), but Ryanair are trying to do the same sort of thing. Mr O’Leary needs to conform to the laws of the countries (plural) in which his business is operating, not just to the laws that suit him. Sadly, this isn’t going to become a big issue as the travelling public rarely care about the implications (be they social, economic or environmental), as long as they continue to get their flights for £0.01 or EUR0.01 or less.

Andy

I couldn’t disagree with you more.

Ryanair employs these staff in France, to work from France, and it should comply with French employment law (just as my employer is American, but I work in the UK and they are therefore required to give me UK pay, terms and conditions). The alternative is that everything sinks to the lowest level – businesses would eventually find the country with the least restrictive labour laws, with the lowest payscales, and with the lowest obligations for things like sickness, holidays, pensions etc and then just employ all their staff from that country.

If Ryanair wants its French staff work to Irish rules with Irish conditions, then they need to relocate the staff to Ireland and have them operate out of Ireland but through France on a regular basis, with all of the typical airline implications that involes in terms of hotel night stops, days and hours away from their [Isish] base duty time limitations, days off back at base, etc. Of course, Ryanair want to avoid some of the expenses of doing that, so they permanently base the staff in France – that means that they need to comply with French employment law. I bet those staff pay taxes in France according to French rates, because the tax rules will dictate that anyone in the country for more than a certain number of days each year has to pay French taxes, and the other rules regarding pay, sickness, vacation, pension etc are no different.

What Ryanair is doing is just another stunt, designed not in the interests of the staff but of finding the lowest and cheapest way of doing business whilst ignorring the law. Ryanair are looking for a way to make things cheaper for them, but more expensive or difficult or restrictive for the staff involved, that’s all. France didn’t invent the rules just to shaft Ryanair – the laws are applicable to staff permantently based in France with any airline.

Andy

Andy,
You have hit the nail on the head,

I couldn’t disagree with you more.

Ryanair employs these staff in France, to work from France, and it should comply with French employment law (just as my employer is American, but I work in the UK and they are therefore required to give me UK pay, terms and conditions). The alternative is that everything sinks to the lowest level – businesses would eventually find the country with the least restrictive labour laws, with the lowest payscales, and with the lowest obligations for things like sickness, holidays, pensions etc and then just employ all their staff from that country.

If Ryanair wants its French staff work to Irish rules with Irish conditions, then they need to relocate the staff to Ireland and have them operate out of Ireland but through France on a regular basis, with all of the typical airline implications that involes in terms of hotel night stops, days and hours away from their [Isish] base duty time limitations, days off back at base, etc. Of course, Ryanair want to avoid some of the expenses of doing that, so they permanently base the staff in France – that means that they need to comply with French employment law. I bet those staff pay taxes in France according to French rates, because the tax rules will dictate that anyone in the country for more than a certain number of days each year has to pay French taxes, and the other rules regarding pay, sickness, vacation, pension etc are no different.

What Ryanair is doing is just another stunt, designed not in the interests of the staff but of finding the lowest and cheapest way of doing business whilst ignorring the law. Ryanair are looking for a way to make things cheaper for them, but more expensive or difficult or restrictive for the staff involved, that’s all. France didn’t invent the rules just to shaft Ryanair – the laws are applicable to staff permantently based in France with any airline.

Andy