Irrespective of who is to blame.
[creep]
Neither bunch have been much cop, as the previous lot failed to squirrel away funds and reduce debt through one of the biggest booms of the 20th century I don't think they are entirely 'blameless' as much as the current lot are entirely 'to blame', the approval of all the mass transport schemes came as a final flush when they realised they had about as much chance of winning the election as the devil riding to work on a snow mobile.
Anyway on with the thread.
[/creep]
History has always shown that the speed of economic recovery is proportional to the depth of the preceeding recession. APD was, indeed, factored in to the costings of a recruitment drive. Remember, this current round of recruiting is driven not only by expansion but also that the current CRA is rapidly approaching and those retiring will need to be replaced regardless of fleet expansion.
As Wiggy has stated most companies have planned on a slow slog to recovery. It is unlikely that BA has anticipated that the current economic storm would blow for quite so long. I understand fully that they, the airlines, are pressurising the Government to allieviate a punitive tax on an industry that already generates a large chunk of revenue.
BA will continue to expand the fleets, the question is now over how long? The FPP could also come under scrutiny with regards to delaying and reducing numbers, who knows?
BA will want to be ready to exploit any recovery if an when it happens. In order to do that they will need hulls and crews available at the right time. Lets just hope that punitive taxes to leave our own country don't drive too many customers overseas to FRA/CDG/AMS etc. prior to boarding their non-APD long haul flight.
Good luck to all the swimmers/applicants.