Originally Posted by Faire d'income
Lucifer reading some of your posts you are quick to criticise wannabees who judge our careers or training centres when they obviously have no experience of either. Yet you are quite happy to attack the concept of a seniority list while either obviously not being part of one ( or being at the bottom ).
I wont waste bandwidth explaining why a seniority system is vital to our industry for reasons of safety, promotion, and income protection. Look it up, instead of looking up at it and whinging in ignorance!
Back to the thread. BA pilots had better be more than willing to strike as Mr. Walsh operates a philosophy that means 'if the staff are not ballotting for action then I'm not pushing them hard enough'.
I have vociferous views to enlighten those who might sooner be lead astray by a fixation on the career, backed by a long number of years experience of BA, the industry and a seniority system.
I won't duplicate what
Nearly Nigel has written as it is pretty comprehensive and I agree with most of it.
Needless to say, if I disagree with you, it doesn't mean I am ignorant, a whinger, bitter, or indeed a manager. I choose to remain entirely anonymous, so feel free to disagree with my views, but don't write me off as ignorant if I disagree - unless your aim is to run an authoritarian state in which case the Russians will welcome you. It simply implies to me that you cannot construct a decent argument on the opposing side.
Fact remains that BA pilots will never strike as three pension schemes include (a) APS whom are very well off, and (b) BAPS who are not going to look out for NAPS, since those same NAPS crew failed to take action to prevent erosion of the terms to those dire ones at BAPS.
However I think that for compulsory redundancy there is a case for rewarding loyalty (ie length of service)
I particularly disagree with this result of seniority - not because the company does not owe some sort of loyalty (it would be ridiculous not to give back to employees), but that you result with a profile of experience that is top heavy, pay that is top heavy, inappropriate strucuture for future development of lower experience levels, and ties the company into a far more expensive structure than their competition.