Verfasst von: aeropersredaktion | 05/06/2014

AEROPERS kritisiert Swiss-Management wegen Verletzung der Sozialpartnerschaft

Medienmitteilung vom 5. Juni 2014

AEROPERS kritisiert Swiss-Management wegen Verletzung der Sozialpartnerschaft

Swiss informiert Öffentlichkeit über Vertragsabschluss mit Swiss European Piloten, unterlässt aber die Information an seinen Sozialpartner.

Mit Befremden reagiert der Pilotenverband AEROPERS auf die gestrige Medienkonferenz der Swiss, in der der Vertragsabschluss mit den Piloten der Swiss European bekannt gegeben wurde. „Es ist bezeichnend, dass das Swiss-Management die Öffentlichkeit noch vor dem Sozialpartner informiert“, so Henning M. Hoffmann, Geschäftsführer der AEROPERS.

Man sei wieder einmal sehr erstaunt über das Verständnis des Swiss-Managements im Umgang mit dem Personal. „Der Stellenwert der Sozialpartnerschaft und deren kulturelle Bedeutung in der Schweiz verlieren unter dem aktuellen Management immer mehr an Bedeutung. Ein wichtiger Erfolgsfaktor wirtschaftlicher Stabilität wird unnötig aufs Spiel gesetzt“, so Hoffmann weiter. Die Operation der Boeing 777 ist Teil des aktuell gültigen GAV11. Eine Auslagerung dieses Flugzeuges lässt somit klare Zweifel daran entstehen, wieviel dem Swiss Management die Einhaltung gültiger Verträge wert ist. Eine mögliche verzögerte Einführung der Boeing 777 um die Piloten der AEROPERS auszubremsen, werde laut AEROPERS 30 bis 50 Millionen Franken kosten. Die angeblichen Einsparungen durch den GAV14 Plus würden somit während der gesamten Laufzeit nie erreicht. Das Swiss-Management täusche die Schweizer Öffentlichkeit über die wahren Beweggründe seines Vorgehens. Die aus der Lufthansazentrale in Frankfurt vorgegeben Droh- und Druckszenarien sollen ohne Rücksicht auf Verluste umgesetzt werden.

AEROPERS wird den nun vorliegenden GAV14 Plus eingehend prüfen und Ende Juli entscheiden, wie der Verband strategisch weiterverfahren wird. Man hoffe aber, dass sich die Befürchtungen, dass der im GAV14 Plus geregelte deutliche Abbau der Ruhezeiten sich auf die Flugsicherheit auswirken könnte, nicht zutreffen.

„Unser Interesse ist weiterhin eine nachhaltig erfolgreiche Swiss. Deshalb sind wir weiterhin an einer gemeinsamen Lösung mit der Swiss und den Kollegen der IPG interessiert um dieses Ziel zu erreichen“, so Hoffmann.


  1. Idiot speaks:

    I respond:
    25 August 2014


    The Harry Hohmeister interview is unbelievably depressing to anyone that understands Swiss (the airline) and Swiss (the national attitude). It cannot go unchallenged.
    From the opening line of your interview with him his cluelessness is patent.
    “Swiss-made, by Swiss” is his supposed mantra. Quite amazing from a German, at an airline owned by and basically now run by a German airline, with a business plan that is German in substance and style regarding union negotiations and with ideas about what should be done that are anathema to the Swiss people, not least the employees at LX.
    If I go to a market and pay for a real Swiss cheese, I do not want to unwrap it at home and find it is in fact an Austrian cheese.
    Wet-leased Tyrolean planes? Sorry, not Swiss. We expect Swiss and Swiss only.
    He’s already off-loaded expensive Swiss crews to Edelweiss on one daily round-trip to JFK.
    Selling a product as one thing, then delivering a cheaper substitute? In any business that would be considered fraud.
    We pay to fly Swiss and get charter airline crew? That shows real contempt for the brand and the customers.
    On other moves:
    Setting up a lower-salaried Geneva base is toxic. You will have a situation where two members of the cabin crew on the same flight, one based in Zurich the other in Geneva, who have different salaries for the same job, with the same seniority.
    It is inevitable. Every flight from ZRH to GVA carries dead-headers commuting for their job. Likely the same in reverse.
    This will affect the service quality, despite Swiss restraint and work ethic. It is sowing the seeds for grumpy crews – something Swiss is not known for.
    Likewise, the “Austrian Airlines” union-busting gambit is in play: they dissolved that airline (Austrian) and made it Tyrolean to get lower salaries as the commuter/regional had more attractive conditions.
    This is the ruse behind putting Swiss European Airline cockpit crews on the new 777’s on order. Senior A340 pilots are fuming, and that isn’t helping the mood.
    Nor is the idea of short-haul Avro pilots going straight to a 777 a good one. Who gets to be the captain and the co-pilot? Neither have experience for that. Add a seasoned Swiss captain to be the junior training the ex-Avro? You may as well tell pilots at Swiss: we don’t care about you and your skills and experience, it’s the money, period.
    Does he understand network synergies vs. collusion and price fixing? Seems not:
    He says: “We have other airlines operating to the same markets or operating on the same itineraries… We have to do more co-ordination. Otherwise, we do not get the added value out of the consolidation.”
    Where’s the value-added to the Star Alliance or any customer?
    That’s collusion and price fixing by another name. But Switzerland actually tolerates if not explicitly allows for duopolies and monopolies, and the laws on collusion are quite liquid. Hooray for Harry!
    Why shouldn’t Austrian and Lufthansa compete with Swiss by, for example, offering lower fares should a Zurcher want to fly from Zurich to, say, Warsaw by offering a lower price if you’re willing to connect at Vienna or Munich or Frankfurt?
    Then there’s the tedious, Lufthansa-driven gripes about competition from the Gulf carriers.
    Fine points exist, but here’s a reality check that totally negates them as far as Swiss is concerned:
    Swiss has a monopoly on the most important business long-haul routes out of ZRH, so they are almost totally unaffected by these airlines (and their Star Alliance partners rule the rest) –
    Monopoly long-haul LX non-stop routes from Zurich:
    • San Francisco
    • Los Angeles
    • Miami
    • Sao Paulo
    • Tokyo
    • Hong Kong
    • Mumbai
    • Delhi
    • Beijing
    • Shanghai
    • Johannesburg
    • Boston
    • Chicago
    • Nairobi
    • Dar Es Salaam
    • Montreal
    Duopoly long-haul routes LX + Star Alliance partner non-stop routes from Zurich:
    • Bangkok
    • Singapore
    • Newark
    • Toronto

    Stop whining. Already Zurich Airport charges the highest fees in Europe, and some of the highest in the world, all aimed (let’s face it) at keeping competitors out. How about that for an argument at an EU court?
    Customer focus? Sorry, he hasn’t a clue:
    “I do not care what kind of aircraft we are flying as long as it is the best in terms of return on investment.”
    Of course that matters, but what about the customer experience? Have him ring Tim Clark over at Emirates and ask him about the A380. The best return on investment? Probably not, that’s likely his 777s. But Clark will point out that they are very popular with travelers and he’s milking them like cash cows in the premium cabins.
    The A380 of course isn’t right for Swiss, but if passengers prefer “X” over “Y” aircraft, any CEO worth his salary needs to put that in the mix.
    His comments about competing with LCC’s is amazing for someone running a premium airline, whose reputation and value rest 100% on that very fact: Swiss premium quality:
    “[customers who are] more flexible, so they don’t care if they fly Monday morning at seven o’clock or Tuesday afternoon at 13:00 – they just want to get somewhere. And they don’t care what kind of service there is on board.”
    Yes, they exist and they fly EasyJet and aren’t even looking at Swiss. And never will.
    But Swiss extracts a premium, and has healthy load factors and profits to show for it because there are many more deep-pocketed Swiss that are going to choose Swiss precisely because they are very time sensitive – the precision Swiss-watch cliché is in fact almost a religion here – and they care a lot about “Schweiz Qualität”.
    Then there’s “Swiss in July rolled out a range of individual travel services dubbed “Swiss Choice””.
    Yes, the choice is that someone flying from Johannesburg to New York via Zurich on Swiss will pay a whopping 116 CHF minimum for pre-assigned seating. Why on Earth? It’s free on BA, AF, LH, KL, Emirates and others competing on that O/D.
    It should be dubbed the “Avoid Swiss Choice”.
    Not mentioned in the article was his slap in the face of Swiss frequent travelers.
    First class awards are now only for the relative handful of SEN and HON level frequent flyers. Period.
    Singapore, with far better First Class doesn’t do that to its frequent flyers, nor even parent Lufthansa. This is entirely a Harry-initiative.
    Someone can travel weekly on Swiss within Europe, at full fares, even business-calls, and not ever reach that level. And that bloke is a very valuable piece of business to Swiss or anyone.
    They’ve been barred from the pointy end of the plane on a free award ticket.
    As an expat here, most of my friends are also expats, and some of them occasionally are lucky enough to get a customer/client to pay a First class fare for them. Some of these would cash out miles to bring along their spouse.
    Sorry, that’s over. What is the logic there? They already control the inventory so it’s not like paying F class customers are shut out. Some of these travelers who fly regularly to London have switched over to BA Avios and switched to BA. Way to go, Harry!
    Hopefully you can do a follow-up addressing at least some of these things. Swiss was ruined once before by an American CEO. Round two, now at the hands of a German.
    Time for a truly independent “Swiss made” CEO.

Kommentar verfassen

Trage deine Daten unten ein oder klicke ein Icon um dich einzuloggen:

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Abmelden /  Ändern )

Google+ Foto

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Google+-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Twitter-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Facebook-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Verbinde mit %s


%d Bloggern gefällt das: