Come on Guys or Girls, try and think out the box and see the bigger picture
I don't believe that we should be persuing 184 heads at a cost to ourselves.
I've just returned from a destination that has lost 2 crew since imposition - what a mess. As I note regularly now, many pax just lose interest in the meal svc in CW due to the extended time it takes to deliver...and not even mentioning the absolutely terrible product we have to offer. Seats are remaining empty on a more regular basis now
Its BASSA not BA that wanted the return of all crew, let alone the 184, infact it was a point of compromise on BAs part that they allowed for the return of 184 crew, with all the problems that Jock raised, eg, the crew paying for this by a more rapid introduction of the "new fleet", blame BASSA not BA
Odeboyse, seats are remaining empty for a number of reasons, some
need to get from A-B with some degree of certainty, would you do this with BASSA threatening more strike action?
And of course the one area not discussed much by the experts on this thread - the pax.
err, thats because they are not allowed, pay attention
to quote Tightslot on page 1
This thread is intended for use by people presently employed as airline staff.
If you do not fall into this category - please do not post here: Please visit the Pax/SLF Forum where there is an active thread running HERE that welcomes your thoughts.