Having watched the debate from afar & decided not to weigh into it initially, I now feel compelled to add my views as a non VS but industry employee.
The Scooby vs VSLHR match went to Scooby for creativity but to VSLHR for pragmatism (IMHO).I have followed this thread for some time & looking at the two contestants joining dates felt that the former could be a union plant & the latter a management plant. Well, Scooby advises he/she is not even a union member but the jury is still out on VSLHR, even as to whether his/her base is actually at LHR. He/She trots out some interesting figures so maybe I should just refer to them.
Actually the original figure covering operating profit was culled (by Scooby, I think) from a newspaper report & quoted £46.8Million. That figure does not seem to have been challenged by supporters of either side & much debate has gone on around it. Latterly, however, VSLHR has come up with a "profit" of £3 million, the disparity between it & the former figure being attributed by him/her to the Virgin Nigeria £40 million loss. Well surely Virgin , having only 50% of the shareholding , would only be hit for 50% ,or £20 million, of the loss?
Additionally , was this profit figure of £3million , a nett figure after the deduction of all indirect operating costs , or just a revised operating profit figure? If the latter ,then VS are losing money overall when all figures are taken into account. Perhaps you can clarify, VSLHR? One of your previous posts made it clear that an operating profit was not indicative of the final figure & set out to demonstrate why.Also, I have heard a figure quoted that relates to the profit made by VS on every £100 invested.It has not been quoted on this site but I wonder if VSLHR has it & could divulge it?? (Came from a Marketing & Sales Conference ,I think).If confirmed this would give a return on Investment (ROI) & could be compared to a Building Society ROI (circa 5-6%)
Now ,on to why I think VSLHR has the edge in this argument.
Scooby has come up with a number of suggestions which are well thought out ,not just in money terms ,but in terms of directing that money to obtain maximum advantage not just for CC but also for the management by cutting down sickness & recognising additional effort on the part of the remaining team when it occurs. However, Scooby has no platform from which he/she can advance these proposals. The CC are unhappy with the union, split over a decision to strike & facing a management which have withdrawn any offers & will fight any strike(s)
VSLHR has consistently said, "there is no money" to pay & I believe him/her.
Read back through the threads, dont just grasp the figure of £47million operating profit.Whether or not it is right or wrong, it does not paint the final picture, which must be worse.
Look at what Tom Sawyer(Engineer) said some time ago. The A346 fleet is just about competitive with the B777 given that Airbus are paying subsidies for it not meeting book performance figures. Well, that was before the latest set of restrictions which reduced the maximum zero fuel weight for a heavily loaded nose heavy aircraft (& they all are when full!). The net result is that cargo is often refused because of weight & balance considerations .(& cargo is worth what in terms of overall revenue VSLHR?? maybe 20-23%??).
Earlier I read on this thread that VS owned the A340-300s but leased the remainder. Well ,the first industry A340-300 has been parted for spares after a life of 10 years or so. This is like you trying to sell your car but realising no one wants it so you break it up & sell the bits. The remainder of the fleet can come from an in house lessor or the bigger companies such as ILFC or GECAS.If its in house ,then sometimes you,as the airline, buy from Mr Airbus directly at a discount as you are a good customer, sell back to an in house lessor at maybe nearer book value , then lease back with lease payments based on that value .You pay a higher lease rate but get to bank a lump sum from the transaction.(being the difference between buying from Airbus & selling on to the lessor).Do VS do it? Don't know ,but suspect not.Can you help VSLHR??.
So VS has the largest (leased?) fleet of A346s within aviation ,(I think) & they dont meet book specification. CX are getting rid of their 3 & even Etihad recently came up with a creative way of disposing of one! Not sure of the other carriers plans but there are no new orders for the A346
Then there was mention of the On Time Performance (OTP) with caustic comments quoting figures in the low teens system wide. Well, in the last month or so VS has hit the system wide OTP target of 50% once ,I believe. VSLHR, you can probably confirm?? Christmas Day?? with Boxing Day a near miss?? Oh yes, that cargo being refused travel due A346 performance, contributes to some of the delays.
Your other shareholder wishes to sell, but will probably have to take a book loss to get out (thats an assumption).
Maybe the above puts your problem into context , Scooby. Any strike will be a lose/ lose situation.The company won't pay & they will lose revenue from cancelled or disrupted flights.Any revenue loss will lower the Load Factor ,(VSLHR, do you have an overall system wide breakeven load factor??) but there will only be a very marginal saving on that lost revenue-the odd meal, some drinks , some sundries, but the checkin , loading, boarding,in flight service,cargo, engineering & the flight operation remains unaltered. The deficit comes straight off any profit margin,(if there is one)
So, my sympathies to Scooby & colleagues-I think some of you know this is looking like a lost cause. My congratulations to VSLHR ,but with one request.If you are able, take what you have gleaned from this thread to the (mis)management side & try to get them to recognise the pride & the esteem that most of their cabin crew still hold for their unique company. Surely its worth both sides rapidly getting together in house for informal talks on how to keep those elements at least,whatever the eventual cost?