Originally Posted by
JM926
completely agree. Guys I know were up in arms when they read the EZY deal which was published a short while ago-saying how we needed a much better pay rise. Sure, everyone wants more money, who doesn’t, but they didn’t seem to grasp that the only reason they were so up in arms was that the FY24 salary in ezy included the company pension contribution. To compare apples with apples you’d need to add on our company pension contribution to our salary. Why you’d ever do that is beyond me!
Personally I understand why they do it because while BA basic pay is generally lower, a big chunk of the overall package is in the pension contributions which would otherwise go ignored if simply comparing basic salary and allowances.
By the same logic an EZY skipper could put 20% of his/her salary into their pension and then claim their salary was 20% less than it is. When the disparity in contributions is so high between EZY and BA (7% vs 15%), you do need to factor it in somehow when comparing the two.
The BA pension is obviously good, but would I rather have it in the basic salary so I could do with it what I please? Yes.
Do we think EZY would be offering the numbers they are if they too had a 15% pension? No.