Joetom

Sorry for drift, but if you thought my last post numbers were good.

About 2 years ago, the Actuaries got involved and changed the numbers, the fellow who wanted to opt for the 18K PA pension and was expecting 125k tax free cash got an uplift of the 125k to about 143k because the Actuaries said it would be more fair.

So as private pensions slide down, public pensions slide up, it must be fair !!!!

teddybear44

Joetom,
Also sorry for thread creep, however

Nothing slides up, only down ! DB pension schemes elsewhere included.

airship

I believe that I've come up with a solution which will be satisfactory to all sides and comprises:

1) BA's board immediately awards Willie Walsh a 10-year package-deal based on his fixed salary today of £732,000 PA (£61,000 x 12), of 1,000 times that, in a combination of future salary / bonuses / stock options etc. on the basis that BA solidly returns to profit at some stage in the future. In other words, BA will immediately contract an obligation to pay out £732,000,000 to Willie Walsh over the next 10 years, all going well.

2) Willie Walsh goes "cap in hand to Gordon Brown" (He who saved all the bankers from destitution). "Oh Great One, save us from the Virgin (Airlines)".

3) As a consequence, BA are given generous government subsidies mostly disguised as government loan guarantees for several £billions. But with the proviso that Willie Walsh himself takes a serious pay cut.

4) Willie Walsh's pay cut (by Gordon Brown / government decree) would involve WW to sacrifice fully 4/5ths of his future 10 year earnings (Ie. £732,000,000 *80%) That is the equivalent of £585,600,000. More than enough to wipe out in an instant BA's £401 million losses declared in May 2009 and add a useful £146.4 million to this fiscal year's cash-flow.

5) Do the sums, and you'll see that everyone's basically much better off. The 800 (out of a total of 40,000+) BA employees who've already volunteered won't have to work for nothing. And even WW who stood to lose £61,000 for not being paid for July 2009, actually still stands to gain the equivalent of £146.4 million over 10 years (all going well) - the equivalent of an extra £1,220,000 per month...?!

Come on then, fault my logic...?!

What about the shareholders...?! Who were the majority shareholders of many US airlines that went into bankrupcy like Delta etc.?! Yeah, the fat-cat pilots mostly earning as much as WW mainly...?!

jordan

I simply can't believe the selfishness of cabin crew for refusing to help support the airline. It's the easiest thing in the world to blame management and everyone else, but the situation is extremely tough, but there is no doubt that BA will pull through when the economy improves. But this kind of 1950's union militancy does absolutely nothing to help all the other employees who rely on an efficient BA.

PC767

Actually circa 39200 employees were selfish enough not to help the company. Why would they, whilst asking fully employed staff to work for free, BA re-employed staff as consultants, on upto £1000 per day, consultants who has recently taken a handsome lump sum to leave. Oh, and just after announcing the initiative as a success, Walsh announces that we are actually doing better than our rivals and still have £1.4billion in the bank.

Circa 39200 employees saw this initiative as a premature and unnecessary request, or a stunt.