The saving would only be £4million per year if no payment protection scheme is in place.
If all crew signed the current deal than it wouldn't matter if MF took NRT/SIN/HKG because crew would all get their wages topped up to the average level of earnings before routes had been transferred.
That's the whole point of the top up agreement is it not?
The main worry from crew seems to be losing money, the company offered the MTP to prevent this. Crew weren't happy with this and asked for the minimum top up scheme instead.
Can I ask why trips like SIN and HKG pay such huge box payments?
Presumably because they are so long and arduous that it is a form of compensation?
Surely then with a payment protection system it would actually be beneficial to lose these routes would it not?
Current crew would still get the same money but could happily earn it on nice short Gulf or stateside trips, mixed fleet would then do all the hard 11/12/13 hour sectors instead.
If on the other hand crew want to fly to HKG and SIN then why do the company pay such huge amounts of money?
If the latest proposal gets rejected then perhaps BA should just carry on and transfer the money routes, the 1000 crew who signed up already would be protected by the top up payment and the company could claw back some of the lost revenue.