- but why make them permanent?
This was the crux of the whole issue which BALPA had to convince the membership of. The first question is "How long is permanent?". Is it truly permanent or is it for the life of the current business plan? To be honest, no-one knows. Either way, the changes are up for negotiation in the future hopefully.
Secondly, BA needs to secure finance to survive. The institutions have indicated that the finance is there however they've evidently applied a few conditions. If you ask why BA is about to impose some severe changes to the cabin crew agreements, you start to get an indication of the conditions which the institutions have applied. They are the ones who need to see permanent changes. What is the point lending £x million to BA if they're going to run into the same problem in a couple of years and need more? Where's the likelihood of a return on the investment?
That's why the changes need to be permanent. Perhaps they can be negotiated back but if there is a finite point in time where these conditions will automatically be restored, the associated costs will be restored as well and that is what the institutions want to avoid.
The "Bond Issue" which has just been announced wouldn't have been forthcoming if the company wasn't sure it would be able to please the investors.