BASSA use BALPA agreements and conditions as leverage and some CC use parts of the pilot agreement as an aspirational benchmark, so they are pertinent to the debate on BA CC pay and conditions.
Are you happy and prepared to accept the BA proposals in their entirety?
No, which is why I would have liked my union to act responsibly and broker a deal that suited the desires of it's membership better. Have I been asked whether I'd rather sacrifice pay or work harder? No, not a thing. Just rants against WW, sour grapes vs the pilots and almost no facts. A miserable performance imho.
Quote:
Have BA provided you with all the information you require on the financial impact of the changes to your salary?
No - aren't my union meant to go over those details with a fine tooth comb? Aren't many of these financial details quite confidential and only for the eyes of a few trusted individuals - i.e our reps?
Quote:
Is your decision truely informed?
Well, I believe my decision is FAR better informed than that of those that swallow the childish BASSA line. What annoys me is that if BASSA actually accepted the need for some change and negotiated it on their terms, then we'd all be better off. As it is, I can only see us taking a huge beating, with Unite selling us out again. At least I have listened to the views of others, considered them all and made an informed decision. I'm comfortable that I've done the best I can.
And all of that means that while I accept the need for some change but not for all of BA's demands, I fear I will have no choice but to accept what BA eventually impose. I don't think that will be too pleasant.
Last edited by Nutjob : 4th July 2009 at 20:41.
Reason: spelling - as usual
What I am really struggling to understand is why are Bassa and for that matter some crew (I’m guessing the militant) so obsessed with the pilots T’s and C’s.
Quote:
whats good for the goose, is good for the gander!!!. Come on BILL I'll have the same as our flight deck. Good for CRM
Surely that just doesn’t apply, and neither does fairness IMHO. Our two groups do two very different jobs with very different responsibilities. On top of that there is a more readily available supply of CC compared to pilots. Compare that principle with why diamonds are expensive. Not every stone can be a diamond.
I’m sorry to have to say (please take this in the spirit in which it is intended – ie not a dig or a rant) that to try and compare pilots and cabin crew pay in this way is plain naïve. We earn more and have (debateable bit now) better T’s and C’s because that’s the whole point of striving to better oneself and move up the social and economic ladder.
By applying Bassa’s logic: Macdonalds staff do the same job as CC (it’s just an illustration NOT my opinion!!) so they should enjoy the same perks and pay. Lets put it another way: Why does the CSD get better pay, room upgrades, different staff travel etc then main crew? Because they have moved up the social and responsibility ladder and are thus rewarded for their hard work.
Why do some CC begrudge pilots? I guess to be honest an element of jealousy creeps in. Who hasn’t looked at say footballers in the UK and thought ‘that’s not fair?’. It’s not fair but that is how the world works. If we all, and that’s everyone from cleaners to people with immense responsibility like surgeons (or pilots ) got that same T’s and C’s, pay and even perks then what is the point of working hard?
So can any of you militant CC or Bassa reps really justify comparing our respective packages? Really?
In much the same way that people equate CSDs (and I have some very good CSD, purser and main crew friends by the way!) and FOs. How can you really justify it?
I sincerely hope this POV is not taken as a rant. Like I said at the start, I just don’t get why some think our jobs, responsibilities etc are in anyway comparable!
Sunny, your point was raised, argued, re-raised, re-argued and so on a few more times in the previous thread on this subject.
Come to that, it has been discussed on this and other PPRuNe forums more times than I care to remember.
Summarizing what I have come across over the past 10 years on PPRuNe, here are the reasons for the difference in pay:
Pilots train for longer than cabin crew
Pilot training is more expensive than cabin crew training
The skill/talent set required to become a pilot is less widely found in the general population than the skill/talent set needed to become a flight attendant
Piloting is a male dominated job, FA-ing is a female dominated job. Male jobs get paid better than female jobs. UK Gender pay gap currently at 20%.
Pilot pay is irrelevant to this thread. As stated by TightSlot above.
In the previous thread, many (supposed) pilots have brought up the deal made by BALPA as an example of what BASSA should have done.
Hence perhaps the continued comparisons between the two groups.
It's easy [for cabin crew] to hate pilots, it touches a collective raw nerve about being inadequate and inferior. At the moment BASSA hate everyone; BA, BALPA and even Unite. They're a cornered wild animal.
I'm sure that while it applies to some, it doesn't to many.
What, a 3% pay cut, for shares in 3 years time? I'm sure they would vote yes for that.
And here is where many of us and our union are just being childish.
I obtained a copy of and read the pilots' agreement thoroughly. The figures may be slightly inaccurate as the cuts were made across basic pay and allowances but generally amounted to a pay cut of about 4.4%. They took a 20% cut in part of their allowances and I reckon that probably equates to 10%-15% cut in total allowances - depending on the type of work rostered. The share options are optional and dependent on some quite substantial profits in the coming years. Share options and employee interest in their company are widely encouraged in good business models such as John Lewis.
The pilots also agreed to work harder with increases in yearly flying hours.
So, BASSA are winding us all up and comparing BA's wishlist (which genuine negotiation would have diluted) to the best bits of the pilots deal. It achieves nothing and we'll just end up with imposition. I'm sick of them!
I cannot believe that WW has no trick up his sleeve in dealing with our militant members. I predict another pasting and I'll be far worse off because of it.
You do yourself and your fellow crew great credit with your rational outlook and realistic view of the world.
My wife is CC and so this will affect my family significantly.
She is fed up with BASSA being run by 1970s militants who know only how to shout and rant when they should be working to get a reasonable deal for their members.
Next election, get yourself in there Nutjob and do your mates a favour!
Ok, please for the last time, lets put the shares deal to bed.
Pilots do not get their paycut back in shares in 5 years time.
The pay cut (basic and allowances) will amount to about £5000p.a. average per pilot. Over 5 years thats £25,000. (Big ouch )
IF we made a 6% operating margin in 5 years time (pretty unlikely) then a Captain would be awarded 807 shares. At £1.25 thats £1008 worth.
A 10% operating margin would give the max of 1346 shares (£1680).
Now here's the big thing that BASSA won't have told you:
It's in return for a no industrial action clause and extra "management duties/structure" of which are yet to be decided on.
The other big thing is that in recognition of a first officers reduced responsibilities compared to a captain his max entitlement is lower at 1015 shares.
So allowing for the reduced responsibilities of CSD's, then Pursers, then main crew you'd probably be down to a couple of hundred shares each.
Hardly worth your extra "management" duties and responsibilities really.
Please see your nearest BASSA rep for the full BALPA deal and I'm sure they'll be happy to explain it all.
Now if this doesn't get deleted can we drop the share deal bit please.
Last edited by plodding along : 5th July 2009 at 15:03.
Summarizing what I have come across over the past 10 years on PPRuNe, here are the reasons for the difference in pay:
Pilots train for longer than cabin crew
Pilot training is more expensive than cabin crew training
The skill/talent set required to become a pilot is less widely found in the general population than the skill/talent set needed to become a flight attendant
Piloting is a male dominated job, FA-ing is a female dominated job. Male jobs get paid better than female jobs. UK Gender pay gap currently at 20%.
Not to mention the command structure on board an aircraft having anything to do with the level of salary paid. Captain in charge, first officer second in charge, pursar etc etc.
I have the same debate going on in my airline with regards to pilot pay vs CC pay. I think it is relevant here if BASSA are using pilot pay as a benchmark so to speak. You can't compare the jobs and therefore have CSD's/Pursars being paid more than the F/O. Rank speaking it's not the CSD's cabin its the Captains then F/O's. Lets get some perspective on rank.
londonmet, to me the chain of command, hierarchy, respective rank etc is such an instinctive and integral part of airline life that I didn´t think to include it.
Thank you for your reply. You'll be amazed how many CC think they should get the same ££ to work off as I do. I simply explain that each of our days off are equally as valuable (non-financially). However, financially speaking a day off working payment is directly linked to ones salary. Unfortunately the arguement doesn't end there. Anyway, back to this thread subject. I hope BA CC pull their heads out of their rear ends and wake up and smell the coffee for the good of the airline and the greater good of the aviation industry.
I think both sides are as bad as each other to be honest. BASSA and BA. BA started this off with a sheet of A4 left on a photocopier (allegedly) and all hell breaks out.
PR side of things with BA and WW with working for free becomes a fast growing joke, and as BA trumpets how xyz number are working for free, EF cabin crew are offered overtime!
The goal posts keep moving and to be honest not sure what to think as I`m not overly keen on BASSA`s idea for EF doing some WW flights. Then again BA`s solutions is slightly more palatable but the flexible roster and 9 days off not great. Hopefully a combination of the 2 will come about with ACAS. The problem is different contracts.. bidders will loose a day off but 6 and 3 work pattern don`t. Most new contract types are bidders.
BA hasn`t given any figures and so how do you make any decision is impossible.
I`m not sure a strike will help anything to be honest, and is it not possible to be taken back on after striking on the new contract type?
One thing, and you do have to laugh, BA has managed to unite the 2 cabin crew unions at last and there is very little bitterness between the two.
I`m not sure why so many cabin crew are keen on the pilots deal. Shares? erm they go up and they go down, and sometimes you can loose all of them. Like my 500 free Bradford Bingley ones. Worthless.
The bigger issue is the pension with it being billions in deficit; wonder if those shares are sweetners just incase the final salary pension is closed to those already in it?
BASSA is hard faced and bullish and has had to be at times. Whether they are right or wrong time will tell. Of course a few pilots and possibly others in the company do know how to pull the strings on cabin crew and BASSA and sometimes that doesn`t help; although you do get a reaction and possibly some kick from it.
Well theres only 1 reason BA have offered EF overtime and thats to keep the operation running during the annual worldwide Wimbledon/Henley/Pride mass sick out. There have been several cancellations as a result anyway.
Just when i thought that the idiocy of these people must have limits they show it doesn't.
Note to BASSA. HKG was 3 747s its now 2 747s and a 777, thats a cut. And whichever route decisions BA make they'll still be significantly less aircraft in the fleet this winter than last. (8 747s, 8 757s, couple of 767s offset by 2 new 318s and 4 777s). Some cursory attempt at research may bear dividends.
Quote:
GLOBAL RECESSION OR (MR WALSHS) GLOBAL EXPANSION?
Jul 5th, 2009 by admin
You will not have missed all the media and press furore surrounding awful times that the aviation industry is experiencing. This sentiment is being led mainly by our own CEO, Willy Walsh, who seems to be doing his level best to talk our airline out of existence as soon as possible.
He has gone on record many times over the last few weeks, reporting the dire state that BA is in, with profits plummeting, empty aircraft and the need for staff to accept ever harsher cuts.
He even went as far as to say that the industry wont recover until 2017 when every other analyst has stated that the recession has already bottomed out and the signs of a slow recovery are beginning to show.
To add weight to this mood of doom and gloom, Mr. Broughton, our chairman, was recently interviewed by Sky News and continued with the line that we are experiencing extremely difficult trading conditions and any recovery is likely to take longer than initially envisaged." However, on ESS today it was also reported that the winter schedule is to actually also be increased as a response to customer demand - we will increase the number of flights from Heathrow to Warsaw and Istanbul from two to three flights a day.
On Worldwide we have recently be told that a new route to Las Vegas is starting in a few months, daily! This is as well as the HKG capacity being increased by adding an additional 777. BA will also increase the number of flights from Heathrow to Rome from five to six a day.
Mr. Walsh said this is the worst trading climate that BA has ever experienced, worse than 911 or the Gulf War. Yet we are still going ahead with the new route to JFK from City Airport?
Only last week, extra flights were also announced, which included additional services from Gatwick to Bermuda (from five to six a week), Barbados (from nine to ten a week) and St Lucia and Port of Spain (from three to five a week), plus flights from Heathrow to Barcelona increasing from five to seven a day and Prague from three to four a day.
Its difficult to judge which of his approaches is the more truthful but what is obvious is that he has got it woefully wrong in talking down our airline to anyone who would listen, solely to create the right atmosphere to push through draconian cuts upon his own staff.
As a CEO he appears oblivious and has seemingly scant regard to the disastrous impact that his statements have had on our advance bookings, as people lose confidence in British Airways. Never mind the fact that the disastrous fuel price fixing, resulting heavy fines and poorly judged fuel price hedging all happened on his watch.
We at the bottom are now being asked to pick up the tab for the mistakes of those at the top.
These errors of judgment alone would make the current round of employees cost cuts unnecessary.
If he were a football manager, he would have been sacked long ago. Its akin to taking Manchester United into non-league football and then attempting to blame the pitch, weather, groundsman, team coach driver, tea ladies and/or the fans.
Read the tabloid sports pages Mr. Walsh and see where the blame normally resides when a team is not doing well...
...The Manager.
Last edited by Hotel Mode : 5th July 2009 at 23:30.
That post is highly selective in its information, ignoring the winter cuts at LGW (BCN removed completely which would account for the additional LHR frequencies) and capacity reduction on, for example, JFK which is seeing many more 777s than 747s (it used to be exclusively 747s).
It also doesn't take into account "dynamic revenue management" which is desperately trying to maintain load factor at the expense of yield (which has fallen off a cliff), meaning that status passengers spending £350 on a Y seat LHR-JFK-LHR end up in Club for one sector and Traveller Plus for the other.
Not to mention a number of HKG flights being tactically cancelled, NRT down to one a day etc etc. It's times like this I wish BA would put out some useful counter information.
) got that same T’s and C’s, pay and even perks then what is the point of working hard? 
)
Linear Mode
