Route Analysis Aer Lingus plans to close its long haul base at Manchester Airport

[Aviador]

Aer Lingus plans to close its long haul base at Manchester Airport

Aer Lingus plans to close its long haul base at Manchester Airport, putting over 200 jobs at risk, including 150 cabin crew.

The airline stated the base is "underperforming" but has not provided financial evidence to support the claim. The announcement comes during an ongoing pay dispute with Unite the union, which has held strike actions.

Unite has called the move "outrageous," noting Aer Lingus's recent profitability. The union has offered to halt further strikes to negotiate and is demanding the airline provide its full business rationale for the closure.

 

[Aviador]

One could argue the company saw through the union bluff on this occasion. The pilots refusal to compromise appears to have been the final straw. A last chance pay resolution might have provided enough time to improve the bases performance.

I understand that flight crews based in Ireland receive lower pay than their UK counterparts. Such a disparity would be difficult to justify at the best of times, let alone when the UK base is underperforming financially.

 

[Scottie Dog]

I thought that I had read that the UK crews were paid far less that the Irish ones.

 

[gulftraveller]

Yes. The whole issue was that UK crew were paid considerably less than their Irish counterparts and had inferior benefits. Given the disparity, I am surprised the conflict with the unions did not happen sooner.

 

[Aviador]

I thought that I had read that the UK crews were paid far less that the Irish ones.

That assertion appears incorrect. Aer Lingus pay is typically lower than at its sister airline, BA. While the crew's posible argument for parity within IAG is strong, it's important to note that BA's Heathrow based wages are also elevated due to London's high cost of living, (London weighting) which makes a direct comparison more complex.

 

[Jerry]

I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing is being used as an excuse to transfer the A330s back to Dublin to increase capacity from there.

 

[Aviador]

I've since read something saying they do pay more in Dublin but if we look at this a little closer, there are some compelling reasons why that might be the case.

In Dublin, Aer Lingus is the Irish flag carrier and a major employer at Dublin airport. To attract and retain the best Irish pilots and cabin crew, they have to compete with other Irish airlines such as Ryanair.

There is also the potential for crew to be poached by major Middle Eastern carriers (Emirates, Qatar, Etihad) or other European airlines (Lufthansa, Air France) who will likely offer competitive packages.

The result is they might need to offer a "flag carrier" premium to secure a stable, high-quality workforce for their core operation.

In contrast, in Manchester, Aer Lingus is a niche, long haul operator. Arguably we're not comparing apples with apples.

The competitive landscape is completely different. They are not trying to hire everyone; they are targeting a specific subset of crew.
The local competitor for pilots in Manchester is TUI Airways, which has a large long-haul base there. Aer Lingus's pay scale only needs to be competitive enough to attract pilots away from TUI or other regional operators. They don't need to match the top-tier Dublin or London wages.

The "Lifestyle" appeal for crew living in the North of England, a Manchester based long haul job with Aer Lingus is highly attractive. It allows them to fly modern aircraft like the A330 on transatlantic routes without having to relocate to London or Dublin, which are far more expensive cities. Aer Lingus can leverage this "quality of life" benefit to offer slightly lower pay.

That is my take on the situation although it does seem to have been a rushed moved by Aer Lingus to go from from pay negotiations to "we're looking to close the base".

 

[Jerry]

Dublin is a quite expensive city to live in as well so more akin to London.

 

[gulftraveller]

I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing is being used as an excuse to transfer the A330s back to Dublin to increase capacity from there.

Yet, with a collapse in Europe-US demand across many airlines, I very much suspect they already have too much capacity and not enough passengers, particularly for gas guzzling A330-300s. Much more likely is that Aer Lingus see stalemate in industrial relations in UK.

 

[Aviador]

Yet, with a collapse in Europe-US demand across many airlines, I very much suspect they already have too much capacity and not enough passengers, particularly for gas guzzling A330-300s. Much more likely is that Aer Lingus see stalemate in industrial relations in UK.

Very true and the Aer Lingus offering is top heavy with flights to the States so you might be onto something there.

 

[Jerry]

Yet, with a collapse in Europe-US demand across many airlines, I very much suspect they already have too much capacity and not enough passengers, particularly for gas guzzling A330-300s. Much more likely is that Aer Lingus see stalemate in industrial relations in UK.

Well need to remember that from Dublin they don't have as high as aviation taxes and they can put the A330s onto the West Coast routes and potentially New York leaving the A321s for other's. Also how old are some of these A330s? If they have older ones at Dublin then these could replace them but in the end Aer Lingus are an Irish airline so will always prioritise Ireland.
It's sad for Manchester if they go but could be an opportunity for Virgin Atlantic to expand with less competition as well as TUI.

 

[Silvercity]

Ireland in general will always have a bigger inbound draw than the North of England. I would expect the majority of Aer Lingus's passengers to the US are UK residents, and they are not travelling to the US much presently. Aer Lingus also has a good regional network to channel UK passengers to their large Dublin - US selection of services.

 

[Jerry]

Ireland in general will always have a bigger inbound draw than the North of England

It is a different market, bigger VFR, ancestral links and what makes it competitive big American companies having their European HQs there. Hence why it's served by all the major US carriers as well.

 

[Aviador]

The Manchester story is an interesting one because it shows how demand alone doesn’t guarantee sustainability. The figures speak for themselves: half a million passengers in the first two years, capacity up year‑on‑year, and demand climbing by 30%. @gulftraveller noted,

The CEO indicated a couple of years ago that the yield was higher than on the same routes from DUB. But maybe she was having trouble with the Irish unions then.” That suggests Manchester wasn’t underperforming in terms of passenger appetite or even yield at certain points.

The key differences, though, lie in the wider operating environment rather than a head to head comparison with Dublin. Dublin benefits from US pre clearance, which is a huge selling point for transatlantic travellers and something Manchester doesnt offer. Dublin also has extensive feed from across Europe, as @David_itl highlighted.

Manchester, by contrast, was operating as a standalone base. Without the same level of connecting feed, it relied heavily on point‑to‑point demand from the North of England. That demand was strong, but the economics of maintaining a separate long haul base, aircraft, crew, maintenance, logistics will have simply made it harder to achieve the same margins. Add in the industrial disputes with Manchester based crew, and the cost base became even more challenging.

So the decision to close the Manchester base wasn’t about competition with Dublin, but about structural realities. Dublin has unique advantages that make long‑haul operations more resilient, while Manchester lacked those support mechanisms. Aer Lingus clearly judged that redeploying aircraft back to Ireland would deliver stronger overall returns, even if Manchester’s flights looked busy and popular.

The lesson here is that “exceptionally well performing” routes can still be vulnerable if the wider framework doesn’t support them. Manchester proved the demand was there, but the absence of pre clearance, connecting feed, and economies of scale meant the economics didn’t stack up. It’s a reminder that in aviation, success isn’t just about full planes, it’s about the infrastructure and strategic context that sits behind them.

 

[Silvercity]

The Manchester story is an interesting one because it shows how demand alone doesn’t guarantee sustainability. The figures speak for themselves: half a million passengers in the first two years, capacity up year‑on‑year, and demand climbing by 30%. @gulftraveller noted,


The key differences, though, lie in the wider operating environment rather than a head to head comparison with Dublin. Dublin benefits from US pre clearance, which is a huge selling point for transatlantic travellers and something Manchester doesnt offer. Dublin also has extensive feed from across Europe, as @David_itl highlighted.

Manchester, by contrast, was operating as a standalone base. Without the same level of connecting feed, it relied heavily on point‑to‑point demand from the North of England. That demand was strong, but the economics of maintaining a separate long haul base, aircraft, crew, maintenance, logistics will have simply made it harder to achieve the same margins. Add in the industrial disputes with Manchester based crew, and the cost base became even more challenging.

So the decision to close the Manchester base wasn’t about competition with Dublin, but about structural realities. Dublin has unique advantages that make long‑haul operations more resilient, while Manchester lacked those support mechanisms. Aer Lingus clearly judged that redeploying aircraft back to Ireland would deliver stronger overall returns, even if Manchester’s flights looked busy and popular.

The lesson here is that “exceptionally well performing” routes can still be vulnerable if the wider framework doesn’t support them. Manchester proved the demand was there, but the absence of pre clearance, connecting feed, and economies of scale meant the economics didn’t stack up. It’s a reminder that in aviation, success isn’t just about full planes, it’s about the infrastructure and strategic context that sits behind them.

The inbound demand from US passengers has a much greater draw to Ireland and Northern England. This is for VFR also for passengers on the ancestry route. Plus as mentioned you have a huge connection spread at Dublin too to many onward destinations.

 

[Jerry]

but the absence of pre clearance, connecting feed, and economies of scale meant the economics didn’t stack up

Doesn't seem to bother Virgin Atlantic though. They've been pretty steadfast at maintaining their Manchester base rather than retreat back to Heathrow. It'll be curious to see what they do and whether the airport can get Delta or another US airline back.

 

[gulftraveller]

I think pre-clearance is a red herring. If you are flying from MAN, routing via DUB will add 2-2.5 hours to the journey time. Immigration in US is a faff, but it is rarely much more than an hour’s wait. Pre-clearance is useful in airports where there is international feed onto US bound flights. I would be surprised to see the programme extended in the next few years.

 

[IanFarquharson]

I think pre-clearance is a red herring. If you are flying from MAN, routing via DUB will add 2-2.5 hours to the journey time. Immigration in US is a faff, but it is rarely much more than an hour’s wait. Pre-clearance is useful in airports where there is international feed onto US bound flights. I would be surprised to see the programme extended in the next few years.

I dont agree - pre-clearance at DUB is fantastic, I have done it many times and very efficent, then walk out as domestic arrival in the US.

 

[KARFA]

I think pre-clearance is a red herring. If you are flying from MAN, routing via DUB will add 2-2.5 hours to the journey time. Immigration in US is a faff, but it is rarely much more than an hour’s wait. Pre-clearance is useful in airports where there is international feed onto US bound flights. I would be surprised to see the programme extended in the next few years.

with the increasing use of Mobile Passport Control and Global Entry, I agree that pre-clearance is becoming less relevant these days - and that trend will only tip further against it in the future.

 

[Jerry]

I dont agree - pre-clearance at DUB is fantastic, I have done it many times and very efficent, then walk out as domestic arrival in the US.

I think it depends though where you're traveling from or too. If someone is traveling to NYC, Orlando, Las Vegas and Atlanta from Manchester then they're more likely to use the direct flights. It offers more of a usp if you're connecting onwards elsewhere ie LAX or SEA where you're going to be making a stop so it's more competitive with the hub routes like LHR, AMS, CDG, ATL etc.
If as well as a traveller you don't want to make the journey to MAN it potentially gives you a local departure point as a rival to well mainly KLM.

with the increasing use of Mobile Passport Control and Global Entry, I agree that pre-clearance is becoming less relevant these days - and that trend will only tip further against it in the future.

Interesting then that Edinburgh wants to have it.