Wizz Air flight operations chief resigns after "bad apples" comment

VSMUT · Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:38 am

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2BV2XA

Darwin Triggs, the Canadian chief pilot of Wizz Air has resigned after the criteria for dismissing pilots at the beginning of the pandemic were released. These dismissals happened just a few months before Wizz Air announced a program to train cabin crew as pilots.

“We start off with the bad apples, so anyone who has caused you grief on a routine basis,” the manager is heard saying in the recording, before suggesting “excessive sickness” or declining to work on days off among reasons for termination.

Among the reasons listed for becoming a "Bad apple" at Wizz Air are:

- Pilots who report sick when they are sick
- Pilots who refuse to work on days off
- Pilots who refuse to perform captains discretion on the insistence of the company

Unfortunately it is a trend that is becoming far too common in European aviation. Ryanair is famed for bullying its staff, and the boss of CityJet Pat Byrne stated in 2016 that unions are a disease.

MCTSET · Fri Apr 09, 2021 10:19 am

EIBPI · Fri Apr 09, 2021 10:39 am

There is unfortunately plenty of that going on at employers throughout Europe and worldwide.

Terrible stuff.

JannEejit · Fri Apr 09, 2021 10:45 am

EIBPI wrote:
There is unfortunately plenty of that going on at employers throughout Europe and worldwide.

Terrible stuff.

Happens in every line of business unfortunately

JannEejit · Fri Apr 09, 2021 10:46 am

MCTSET wrote:
Wow

No...Wizz ! :lol:

Interflug74 · Fri Apr 09, 2021 11:29 am

what an... bad Apple

mxaxai · Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:13 pm

Interflug74 wrote:
what an... bad Apple

More of a rotten fruit basket. All the base managers who followed his orders, who enjoyed terminating "that guy who's a pain in your ass", who lied on behalf of their boss.

This must be the "Wizz culture" he talks about.

Dufo · Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:13 pm

Great to see true face of this horrow show. I wonder how long this post is gonna stay online.

2175301 · Fri Apr 09, 2021 5:01 pm

I foresee Wizz Air loosing a lot of lawsuits for improper termination with the publication of that information. Virtually every pilot terminated can likely file a claim (or be part of a class action lawsuit if Canada allows those) - and Wizz Air is going to have a hard time rebutting things.

holczakker · Fri Apr 09, 2021 5:24 pm

VSMUT wrote:
Among the reasons listed for becoming a "Bad apple" at Wizz Air are:
...
- Pilots who refuse to perform captains discretion on the insistence of the company

That's downright illegal and beyond the "Wizz culture" excuse blahblah.

zkojq · Fri Apr 09, 2021 5:33 pm

Scummy employment practices from an awful airline. Unfortunately this kind of stuff will keep happening so long as the practice of pilots being independent contractors, not employees, is allowed to continue. You can be sure that the same thing will be happening at other carriers that have similar crewing arrangements.

The culture of fear here is not the bug, but the feature. Now all Wizzair flight crew know that calling in sick, not operating when fatigued or diverting rather than continuing after a technical issue could well be the difference between getting their paycheck and joining the unemployment queue. People (rightly) criticized the First Officer of JT610 for flying whilst clearly very unwell, but many don't seem to appreciate that situations like that don't happen in a vaccume. Company culture is important.

zkojq · Fri Apr 09, 2021 5:47 pm

holczakker wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
Among the reasons listed for becoming a "Bad apple" at Wizz Air are:
...
- Pilots who refuse to perform captains discretion on the insistence of the company

That's downright illegal and beyond the "Wizz culture" excuse blahblah.

Exactly but when does any airline ever get prosecuted for this? A couple of years ago a Thomas Cook 767 Captain was dismissed for refusing to operate a flight into Captain's Discretion when the airline was short crewed (no second officer available). He won his civil case against the airline for wrongful dismissal. The penalty for the airline for trying to force him into doing something unlawful: having to give him his job back. The incentives are stacked very much in favor of airlines doing this, sadly.

https://www.balpa.org/Media-Centre/Pres ... on-fatigue

GayFA · Fri Apr 09, 2021 5:56 pm

zkojq wrote:
Scummy employment practices from an awful airline. Unfortunately this kind of stuff will keep happening so long as the practice of pilots being independent contractors, not employees, is allowed to continue. You can be sure that the same thing will be happening at other carriers that have similar crewing arrangements.

The culture of fear here is not the bug, but the feature. Now all Wizzair flight crew know that calling in sick, not operating when fatigued or diverting rather than continuing after a technical issue could well be the difference between getting their paycheck and joining the unemployment queue. People (rightly) criticized the First Officer of JT610 for flying whilst clearly very unwell, but many don't seem to appreciate that situations like that don't happen in a vaccume. Company culture is important.

Next the usual suspects join the thread to explain that this is just competing properly and the chaps from legacies shouldn't feel so entitled or upset about it.

EightyFour · Sat Apr 10, 2021 7:06 am

Sad but not surprising at all. The "race to the bottom" which is often mentioned and discussed on here in a service level context also means poor and potentially unsafe working conditions for staff which is much more serious than service level. Goes to show that the criticism of Wizz in Norway due to working conditions was indeed correct.

TWA772LR · Sat Apr 10, 2021 7:22 am

When I was a custer service agent at Southwest, it was in our union contract that we could have mandatory OT on our day off for up to 13 consecutive days and we were penalized if we turned it down.

CX Flyboy · Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:01 am

This is very very common in many many airlines all around the world, it is just that management are normally smart enough not to publicize that they do it!

vegas005 · Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:30 am

My employer did the same things...but started with highest salaries first ... a bunch of losers.

torin · Sat Apr 10, 2021 10:12 am

2175301 wrote:
I foresee Wizz Air loosing a lot of lawsuits for improper termination with the publication of that information. Virtually every pilot terminated can likely file a claim (or be part of a class action lawsuit if Canada allows those) - and Wizz Air is going to have a hard time rebutting things.

How does Canada have any jurisdiction?

worldranger · Sat Apr 10, 2021 10:29 am

DT was schooled in all the terrible man mgt practices for many years at Emirates as an ACP -Airbus. He was essentially institutionalized in a ME Co where pilots have little to no legal recourse despite abysmal HR practices.

EK went one worse than Wizz - in that they not only fired out of seniority on the ‘bad apple’ model but sadly those who had long term sick leave beyond their control - and hence were considered too costly.

I hope one day the Av journalists (Quest?) who fawn over Sir Tim Clark actually start asking about these shameful practices.

Only by being called to task publicly will EK, QR and all the rest of them - be forced to act. Not because of integrity- but because of the threat of a PR snowball effect.

The US/EU majors should use this as another reason to deny expanded flight rights.

Blerg · Sat Apr 10, 2021 12:49 pm

Why is anyone surprised by this. Customers want cheap flights and those come at a cost. That cost is usually paid by airports who have to offer lower charges and then employees who agree to unfortunate work conditions. We all remember those threads about Wizz Air and Lauda salaries in Vienna.
In the end if you get people to vote on what they would rather have, a business with normal work conditions at a higher cost or more of this but with lower fares, well... we all know which way the vote will go.

Personally I don't see anything wrong with the guy's statement. No one is forced to work for such a company. You don't like the work conditions? No problem, look for a job elsewhere. What I hate is people getting a crappy job and then complaining about it. Work conditions at these airlines are not really a secret. Don't apply for a job there if you know you are not ready to face the reality.

Think about all this the next time you buy a €9.99 ticket.

Blerg · Sat Apr 10, 2021 12:53 pm

worldranger wrote:
DT was schooled in all the terrible man mgt practices for many years at Emirates as an ACP -Airbus. He was essentially institutionalized in a ME Co where pilots have little to no legal recourse despite abysmal HR practices.

EK went one worse than Wizz - in that they not only fired out of seniority on the ‘bad apple’ model but sadly those who had long term sick leave beyond their control - and hence were considered too costly.

I hope one day the Av journalists (Quest?) who fawn over Sir Tim Clark actually start asking about these shameful practices.

Only by being called to task publicly will EK, QR and all the rest of them - be forced to act. Not because of integrity- but because of the threat of a PR snowball effect.

The US/EU majors should use this as another reason to deny expanded flight rights.

What PR snowball effect? There is no such a thing. Airlines such as EK or QR will simply have a sale with dirt cheap tickets. People will rush to buy them and once they experience the product they will forget all about the pilots and their struggles.

VSMUT · Sat Apr 10, 2021 1:08 pm

Blerg wrote:
No one is forced to work for such a company. You don't like the work conditions? No problem, look for a job elsewhere.

Look for a job where exactly? Wizz and Ryanair have killed off other options. What few alternatives remain are forced to cut terms and conditions to compete. Your statement only holds water in a free market. It isn't a free market if there aren't other players.

Blerg · Sat Apr 10, 2021 2:23 pm

VSMUT wrote:
Blerg wrote:
No one is forced to work for such a company. You don't like the work conditions? No problem, look for a job elsewhere.

Look for a job where exactly? Wizz and Ryanair have killed off other options. What few alternatives remain are forced to cut terms and conditions to compete. Your statement only holds water in a free market. It isn't a free market if there aren't other players.

Wrong. Wizz Air and Ryanair have not killed other options, consumers have. These airlines have produced a product which only became successful because people paid for it.
Also why are we ignoring airports who inked deals with these airlines?

RexBanner · Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:44 pm

EASA will most certainly turn a blind eye to this. Just as they turned a blind eye to the rostering practices at the same airline where you’d be planned in excess of 100 block hours on the expectation that your achieved block times would be chipped away at by enough to get you ever so slightly under the limit by the end of the month.

travelsonic · Sat Apr 10, 2021 8:10 pm

Blerg wrote:
Why is anyone surprised by this. Customers want cheap flights and those come at a cost..

IMO, putting it on customers is disgusting, especially when it comes to things like airlines firing pilots for refusing to work when sick.

I mean, how can this even be demonstrated to be related at all, and not just baseless assumption?

worldranger · Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:30 am

Blerg wrote:
Why is anyone surprised by this. Customers want cheap flights and those come at a cost. That cost is usually paid by airports who have to offer lower charges and then employees who agree to unfortunate work conditions. We all remember those threads about Wizz Air and Lauda salaries in Vienna.
In the end if you get people to vote on what they would rather have, a business with normal work conditions at a higher cost or more of this but with lower fares, well... we all know which way the vote will go.

Personally I don't see anything wrong with the guy's statement. No one is forced to work for such a company. You don't like the work conditions? No problem, look for a job elsewhere. What I hate is people getting a crappy job and then complaining about it. Work conditions at these airlines are not really a secret. Don't apply for a job there if you know you are not ready to face the reality.

Think about all this the next time you buy a €9.99 ticket.

The above attitude is the reason European pilots are so far behind the US in terms of union protection - a laissez fair “no one cares, every man for himself”
The lack of unity imbedded in your psyche leaves pilots worldwide weaker. The Americans have it down to an art - you abuse, we ‘collectively’ down tools.

zkojq · Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:38 am

Blerg wrote:
You don't like the work conditions? No problem, look for a job elsewhere.

Ah the old "if you don't like it then leave" line. Emirates chief pilot loved to parrot that one then acted all surprised in 2017/8/9 when tonnes of crew did just that, leaving the airline significantly short staffed. The best bit was when they tried to spin it as completely unforeseen.

https://onemileatatime.com/emirates-red ... -staffing/

Blerg wrote:
Think about all this the next time you buy a €9.99 ticket.

I don't buy €9.99 fares. And I also don't buy the products of Child Labour.....

travelsonic wrote:
Blerg wrote:
Why is anyone surprised by this. Customers want cheap flights and those come at a cost..

IMO, putting it on customers is disgusting, especially when it comes to things like airlines firing pilots for refusing to work when sick.

I mean, how can this even be demonstrated to be related at all, and not just baseless assumption?

Exactly it's a stupid argument. How are regular members of the public supposed to know where/how to weigh up how fatiguing an airline's rostering/sickleave policies?

When I buy an airfare, i expect the airline to provide qualified, competent, well rested crew who won't be flying if they're not feeling well. I also expect that when someone does inevitably get sick, the airline has enough spare crew to ensure that the flight won't incur a substantial delay - at least when departing from a hub (it's a bit more difficult when crew overnighting at an out station get sick).

None of these expectations are unreasonable.

Blerg · Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:50 am

travelsonic wrote:
Blerg wrote:
Why is anyone surprised by this. Customers want cheap flights and those come at a cost..

IMO, putting it on customers is disgusting, especially when it comes to things like airlines firing pilots for refusing to work when sick.

I mean, how can this even be demonstrated to be related at all, and not just baseless assumption?

How is it disgusting? Are you a regular on these airlines so you feel directly attacked?

These airlines thrived because people kept on returning to them. It was the consumers who helped them grow to what they are today and to expand their business across borders into new markets.

travelsonic · Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:53 am

Blerg wrote:
travelsonic wrote:
Blerg wrote:
Why is anyone surprised by this. Customers want cheap flights and those come at a cost..

IMO, putting it on customers is disgusting, especially when it comes to things like airlines firing pilots for refusing to work when sick.

I mean, how can this even be demonstrated to be related at all, and not just baseless assumption?

How is it disgusting? .

Because the way airlines treat, or mistreat their pilots is on them, and their management, period. If making sure their pilots being sick didn't blow the whole works, they should look within, not try pushing the fare-saving boogeyman (which is applicable in some airline ops matters, I'm sure, but not everywhere).

Blerg · Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:55 am

zkojq wrote:
Blerg wrote:
You don't like the work conditions? No problem, look for a job elsewhere.

Ah the old "if you don't like it then leave" line. Emirates chief pilot loved to parrot that one then acted all surprised in 2017/8/9 when tonnes of crew did just that, leaving the airline significantly short staffed. The best bit was when they tried to spin it as completely unforeseen.

https://onemileatatime.com/emirates-red ... -staffing/

Blerg wrote:
Think about all this the next time you buy a €9.99 ticket.

I don't buy €9.99 fares. And I also don't buy the products of Child Labour.....

travelsonic wrote:
Blerg wrote:
Why is anyone surprised by this. Customers want cheap flights and those come at a cost..

IMO, putting it on customers is disgusting, especially when it comes to things like airlines firing pilots for refusing to work when sick.

I mean, how can this even be demonstrated to be related at all, and not just baseless assumption?

Exactly it's a stupid argument. How are regular members of the public supposed to know where/how to weigh up how fatiguing an airline's rostering/sickleave policies?

When I buy an airfare, i expect the airline to provide qualified, competent, well rested crew who won't be flying if they're not feeling well. I also expect that when someone does inevitably get sick, the airline has enough spare crew to ensure that the flight won't incur a substantial delay - at least when departing from a hub (it's a bit more difficult when crew overnighting at an out station get sick).

None of these expectations are unreasonable.

We can go on and on until the end of time but in the end if your average consumer is presented with a choice mentioned in my post above we know what he will go for. It's a very sober and realistic way of looking at things. Personally I don't fly on LCCs because I hate them. However as aviation turns into mass travel you will get more and more people with limited income looking for cheap tickets. That's where FR and W6 come in.
That's also what will lead airlines such as BA, AF, KL... to look at ways to adjust their costs in order to expand their customer base. You can attack me or airline CEOs out there but it won't change the reality of things.

TTailedTiger · Sun Apr 11, 2021 10:09 am

Blerg wrote:
Why is anyone surprised by this. Customers want cheap flights and those come at a cost. That cost is usually paid by airports who have to offer lower charges and then employees who agree to unfortunate work conditions. We all remember those threads about Wizz Air and Lauda salaries in Vienna.
In the end if you get people to vote on what they would rather have, a business with normal work conditions at a higher cost or more of this but with lower fares, well... we all know which way the vote will go.

Personally I don't see anything wrong with the guy's statement. No one is forced to work for such a company. You don't like the work conditions? No problem, look for a job elsewhere. What I hate is people getting a crappy job and then complaining about it. Work conditions at these airlines are not really a secret. Don't apply for a job there if you know you are not ready to face the reality.

Think about all this the next time you buy a €9.99 ticket.

Agreed. It's like the people who buy a house next to the airport and then complain about the noise. You can't expect the red carpet treatment when working at a ULCC.

dstblj52 · Mon Apr 19, 2021 9:01 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
Blerg wrote:
Why is anyone surprised by this. Customers want cheap flights and those come at a cost. That cost is usually paid by airports who have to offer lower charges and then employees who agree to unfortunate work conditions. We all remember those threads about Wizz Air and Lauda salaries in Vienna.
In the end if you get people to vote on what they would rather have, a business with normal work conditions at a higher cost or more of this but with lower fares, well... we all know which way the vote will go.

Personally I don't see anything wrong with the guy's statement. No one is forced to work for such a company. You don't like the work conditions? No problem, look for a job elsewhere. What I hate is people getting a crappy job and then complaining about it. Work conditions at these airlines are not really a secret. Don't apply for a job there if you know you are not ready to face the reality.

Think about all this the next time you buy a €9.99 ticket.

Agreed. It's like the people who buy a house next to the airport and then complain about the noise. You can't expect the red carpet treatment when working at a ULCC.

Legal treatment is a fair expectation and easa really needs to crack down on a lot of these ops they need a 1500 hour rule pronto

aerorobnz · Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:16 pm

I was expecting to come in here and read a pathetic tale of media overreaction and hyperbole. That was worse than I thought it would be and he deserves everything he gets for that one. Not surprised it was Wizz or an LCC, but it could have been any airline these days as they are all as bad as each other when it comes to using the plague as a scapegoat for carrying out and fulfiling their corporate wishlists without union strikes and the loss of face/brand in the public arena.

holczakker · Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:37 pm

aerorobnz wrote:
That was worse than I thought it would be and he deserves everything he gets for that one.

Everything he gets? He "resigned" from his role and continues to fly for Wizz. That's all he got.

acecrackshot · Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:56 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:

Agreed. It's like the people who buy a house next to the airport and then complain about the noise. You can't expect the red carpet treatment when working at a ULCC.

LOL. Pilot pushing doesn't equal "red carpet treatment."

Weren't you demanding cockpit cameras in the other thread? Well, here's a hint what your missing on film...pilots trying to stay awake and flying sick due to safety eroding company practices.

If you're such a safety fanatic, I don't know a single actual flight deck crew member that wouldn't consider fatigue a significant controllable risk to flight safety.

acecrackshot · Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:58 pm

dstblj52 wrote:
Legal treatment is a fair expectation and easa really needs to crack down on a lot of these ops they need a 1500 hour rule pronto

Sadly, its far easier to negotiate these with a company than it is to wait for regulatory authorities.

I too believe that a crew served aircraft should have two actual ATPLs, and that the current US FAR 117 crew rest rules are very good, scientifically based and should be close to a global standard.

Veigar · Tue Apr 20, 2021 5:44 pm

Would it be appropriate to call this nepotism?

Veigar · Tue Apr 20, 2021 5:45 pm

Dupe sorry!

aerorobnz · Tue Apr 20, 2021 11:23 pm

holczakker wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
That was worse than I thought it would be and he deserves everything he gets for that one.

Everything he gets? He "resigned" from his role and continues to fly for Wizz. That's all he got.

Well if he did that at an airline I know, that would result in at least a drop of salary in the order of 200k a year and other stock benefits at that level of management. Not insignificant to most people. As a pilot, he will just be flying with people who will harbour strong feelings about him, and again, at the same airline I mentioned, Pilots all have a contractual nomination of a 'no-fly crew they can't be rostered with if they desire. If they all ostracised him, I doubt he will last long, especially as useability is a key selection in further redundancies. Maybe not a permanent activist takedown, but not without consequence.

Blerg · Wed Apr 21, 2021 5:13 am

aerorobnz wrote:
holczakker wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
That was worse than I thought it would be and he deserves everything he gets for that one.

Everything he gets? He "resigned" from his role and continues to fly for Wizz. That's all he got.

Well if he did that at an airline I know, that would result in at least a drop of salary in the order of 200k a year and other stock benefits at that level of management. Not insignificant to most people. As a pilot, he will just be flying with people who will harbour strong feelings about him, and again, at the same airline I mentioned, Pilots all have a contractual nomination of a 'no-fly crew they can't be rostered with if they desire. If they all ostracised him, I doubt he will last long, especially as useability is a key selection in further redundancies. Maybe not a permanent activist takedown, but not without consequence.

I disagree, there is no need for a witch hunt to take place. Why should one man be punished for something top level management probably approved of? I doubt much will change with him gone, after all, he was just one bad apple in a basket full of bad apples. Social justice crusades rarely produce the needed effect and are generally a waste of time.
If you have a problem with Wizz Air then it's very simply, don't fly with them.

VSMUT · Wed Apr 21, 2021 5:32 am

aerorobnz wrote:
As a pilot, he will just be flying with people who will harbour strong feelings about him, and again, at the same airline I mentioned, Pilots all have a contractual nomination of a 'no-fly crew they can't be rostered with if they desire. If they all ostracised him, I doubt he will last long, especially as useability is a key selection in further redundancies. Maybe not a permanent activist takedown, but not without consequence.

I doubt Wizz Air has such a setup. Even if they did, he got rid of all the pilots who would be critical of him, remember? It's mostly just all the self-employed Confair guys with weak contracts left.

ataboy · Wed Apr 21, 2021 8:55 am

Just remember culture starts right from the top. At the end of the day, every organization has those who take advantage of the system and make the rest look bad. As a manager, you spend 90% of your time managing 5% of the pilots. The majority of employed pilots do the job in the proper manner and have professional integrity, there are some that think the world revolves around them, not just in their professional lives. Low-cost operations are run on data and have to squeeze water from a prune. It's not an environment for those who cannot keep up, be it for health reasons or just plain lack of drive. Unfortunately, that is the current state of the aviation industry, it is not the most pleasant of environments to work in especially during this pandemic, only the strong survive.

VSMUT · Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:37 am

ataboy wrote:
Low-cost operations are run on data and have to squeeze water from a prune. It's not an environment for those who cannot keep up, be it for health reasons or just plain lack of drive. Unfortunately, that is the current state of the aviation industry, it is not the most pleasant of environments to work in especially during this pandemic, only the strong survive.

Low cost or not, there are still minimum safety standards that must be met. Air crew aren't supposed to fly when they are sick. They need to rest. Fatigue is one of the most common recurring causes in accidents.

It gets especially aggravating when you have cases like this, with Wizz Air crew who had the Coronavirus! You've really got to wonder if they didn't receive a "friendly" phone call to encourage them to fly that trip. Then it is no longer just aviation safety, but a major risk for everyone else as well.

https://www.newsinenglish.no/2020/11/16 ... th-corona/

holczakker · Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:34 pm

aerorobnz wrote:
holczakker wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
That was worse than I thought it would be and he deserves everything he gets for that one.

Everything he gets? He "resigned" from his role and continues to fly for Wizz. That's all he got.

Well if he did that at an airline I know, that would result in at least a drop of salary in the order of 200k a year and other stock benefits at that level of management. Not insignificant to most people. As a pilot, he will just be flying with people who will harbour strong feelings about him, and again, at the same airline I mentioned, Pilots all have a contractual nomination of a 'no-fly crew they can't be rostered with if they desire. If they all ostracised him, I doubt he will last long, especially as useability is a key selection in further redundancies. Maybe not a permanent activist takedown, but not without consequence.

Something tells meg that he will be compensated for this tragic financial loss... As for the strong feelings: those existed already for quite some time, no change there.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net