Willie Walsh is the man to head BA
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearly M.Mouse’s deep insight into the complex issues surrounding British Airways means that he has not only previously been a director of a major international airline, but he must have been a CEO of one as well.
Thank god PAXboy / GS-Alpha / TwoDeadDogs (and others) are still able to focus on the topic, rather than trying to show us how big time they are!!!!!
Thank god PAXboy / GS-Alpha / TwoDeadDogs (and others) are still able to focus on the topic, rather than trying to show us how big time they are!!!!!
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: 5530N
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bottom line is ww must preform, the bar has been set at high level, as against running in his previous employment equating to a small flying club , ba is a monster in comparision. If ww does'nt preform he's out and thats the bottom line. If he antagonises every one his position will be untenable. ww has the reputation of hard ball tactics but this is the big time now in ba and shutting down ba for a day or two when confronting unions as he did in his previous position will see him this time licking his wounds with the kick in the ar*e he'll receive from all quarters.
Last edited by Bearcat; 12th Mar 2005 at 15:09.
Controversial, moi?
Thank god PAXboy / GS-Alpha / TwoDeadDogs (and others) are still able to focus on the topic, rather than trying to show us how big time they are!!!!!
I was impressed that tdd had a better grasp of the economics of Aer Lingus than the board did.
I don't have that insight and have to assume that decisions are made in the light of the best information and strategy available at the time.
WW did something right judging by the balance sheet.
Hi all
Mouse,I'm just a line guy but even I and my colleagues can figure things out for ourselves, as well as talk to the pilots, cabin crew, loaders, caterers, ops people,etc and see where the company is going. One thing about WW is that he will go to each department, look you in the eye and tell you what his plans are. That includes taking flak from the staff, as well. Often, we had bosses who were utterly divorced from the troops and stayed in the head office, out of sight and reach.
As for decisions that we percieved to be wrong, during the 146 period,WW told us that the company was pulling out of short-haul routes such as Dub-Man and Dub-BHX, because of low load factors. We knew that the routes had good loads and good returns, so we were a bit taken aback. We also knew that the average load factor was 77%.Which is not bad for a 146, by any stretch. When asked what constituted an acceptable LF, we were told 80%. We then asked, if the 146 was replaced by a 737 or a 320, how he expected these more expensive, larger aircraft to outdo a cheap 146? Ultimately, it turned out he needed a reason to ground the 146s and phase them out. We knew that the routes were sound, as is evidenced by continued good loads on the bigger jets, so Willie lost brownies with us right away, by trying to snow us, instead of using his much-vaunted straight talk to tell us his real plans.
As for the union aspect, I have to say that, in my experience, most people in the company aren't spring-loaded to the "strike" position. We are not remotely as bolshie as in other companies and a lot of the agitation comes from a small core of people who are close to SIPTU and the like. Most of prefer to sort out our needs at local level, without moving it upstairs or in to the hands of axe-grinding union people.Our company is not as hide-bound as is believed.
regards
TDD
Mouse,I'm just a line guy but even I and my colleagues can figure things out for ourselves, as well as talk to the pilots, cabin crew, loaders, caterers, ops people,etc and see where the company is going. One thing about WW is that he will go to each department, look you in the eye and tell you what his plans are. That includes taking flak from the staff, as well. Often, we had bosses who were utterly divorced from the troops and stayed in the head office, out of sight and reach.
As for decisions that we percieved to be wrong, during the 146 period,WW told us that the company was pulling out of short-haul routes such as Dub-Man and Dub-BHX, because of low load factors. We knew that the routes had good loads and good returns, so we were a bit taken aback. We also knew that the average load factor was 77%.Which is not bad for a 146, by any stretch. When asked what constituted an acceptable LF, we were told 80%. We then asked, if the 146 was replaced by a 737 or a 320, how he expected these more expensive, larger aircraft to outdo a cheap 146? Ultimately, it turned out he needed a reason to ground the 146s and phase them out. We knew that the routes were sound, as is evidenced by continued good loads on the bigger jets, so Willie lost brownies with us right away, by trying to snow us, instead of using his much-vaunted straight talk to tell us his real plans.
As for the union aspect, I have to say that, in my experience, most people in the company aren't spring-loaded to the "strike" position. We are not remotely as bolshie as in other companies and a lot of the agitation comes from a small core of people who are close to SIPTU and the like. Most of prefer to sort out our needs at local level, without moving it upstairs or in to the hands of axe-grinding union people.Our company is not as hide-bound as is believed.
regards
TDD
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mid Atlantic
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WW is so surrounded by hype that I seriously doubt the guy the personal fortitude to ignore it and keep his feet on the ground. In his latter days in Aer Lingus he displayed a stunning ignorance of the down and dirty politics that govern semi-state business in Ireland.
In pilots terms this could best be described as failing to see 'The Big Picture'.
The HYPE got to Willy - he started to think he was Mick O'Leary Mark 2.
The difference, of course, was that while O'Leary is a private individual running a private enterprise, Walsh was just a civil servant.
When O'Leary takes out a full page advert in the Irish papers lambasting and denigrating the Taoiseach (prime minister) the politicians squirm in embarrassment.
When Willy got the idea he could embarrass the government into doing his bidding in the same manner...he put his own head on the chopping block.
There lies the seed of Willys downfall in BA. Arrogance.
Just remember this...WW will always do whats good for Willy. Forget about what might be good for your company. If the two interests coincide (as happily they usually do) then all will progress well. But when the interests of BA, or its pax or its staff are put up against the interests of WW...he'll screw up like he did before.
In pilots terms this could best be described as failing to see 'The Big Picture'.
The HYPE got to Willy - he started to think he was Mick O'Leary Mark 2.
The difference, of course, was that while O'Leary is a private individual running a private enterprise, Walsh was just a civil servant.
When O'Leary takes out a full page advert in the Irish papers lambasting and denigrating the Taoiseach (prime minister) the politicians squirm in embarrassment.
When Willy got the idea he could embarrass the government into doing his bidding in the same manner...he put his own head on the chopping block.
There lies the seed of Willys downfall in BA. Arrogance.
Just remember this...WW will always do whats good for Willy. Forget about what might be good for your company. If the two interests coincide (as happily they usually do) then all will progress well. But when the interests of BA, or its pax or its staff are put up against the interests of WW...he'll screw up like he did before.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WW -v- Bertie
Is what happened with WW's departure from EI necessarily his fault. At the end of the day, a CEO needs to have freedom to act. Bertie - as we're seeing more and more clearly by the day - has sold his soul to SIPTU. Whatever SIPTU wants SIPTU gets. Look at what's happening now: SIPTU's going to have a share in the new terminal, decide where it will be (a very bad location, considering the need for future growth) and dictate the conditions for EI's part privatisation.
Remember that all WW wanted was a decision, not funding. He wanted to be able to develop and build the airline. Without that, what was the point in staying on and with that in mind, perhaps the best option open was to go elsewhere, but try and make the govt take its responsibilities to EI seriously.
We saw the results; the govt dithered - and it is STILL doing so. To Bertie, EI is just a political football. We'll see over the course of the next few weeks what happens re the new CEO. My guess is that they will demand some pretty cast iron assurances and decisions to be made and if the govt reneges they'll walk.
Remember that all WW wanted was a decision, not funding. He wanted to be able to develop and build the airline. Without that, what was the point in staying on and with that in mind, perhaps the best option open was to go elsewhere, but try and make the govt take its responsibilities to EI seriously.
We saw the results; the govt dithered - and it is STILL doing so. To Bertie, EI is just a political football. We'll see over the course of the next few weeks what happens re the new CEO. My guess is that they will demand some pretty cast iron assurances and decisions to be made and if the govt reneges they'll walk.
Hi Mouse et al
I'm not claiming any economic superiority over anyone.Aer Lingus has been profiting from the carriage of cargo since the days of the 737 combi and the 747s. At one time, the 747s were the only aircraft making a profit, because of the Premier passengers and the cargo. That continued when the 330s came on line.If you want a really stupid decision, you only have to look at the culling of the cadets and our engineering apprentices. At a stroke, the next generation were axed, for a patently false economy. Now we are having to import trained engineers, who, naturally, are more expensive than 3rd year apprentos. The pilot numbers are thinning as the special leavers stay away and the numbers of retirees increases. I don't need an economics degree to see that that was a dumb idea. Now, we need trained people and they are hard to come by. You can call me stubborn but I don't think racing Mick O'Leary to the bottom is necessarily a good idea.
regards
TDD
I'm not claiming any economic superiority over anyone.Aer Lingus has been profiting from the carriage of cargo since the days of the 737 combi and the 747s. At one time, the 747s were the only aircraft making a profit, because of the Premier passengers and the cargo. That continued when the 330s came on line.If you want a really stupid decision, you only have to look at the culling of the cadets and our engineering apprentices. At a stroke, the next generation were axed, for a patently false economy. Now we are having to import trained engineers, who, naturally, are more expensive than 3rd year apprentos. The pilot numbers are thinning as the special leavers stay away and the numbers of retirees increases. I don't need an economics degree to see that that was a dumb idea. Now, we need trained people and they are hard to come by. You can call me stubborn but I don't think racing Mick O'Leary to the bottom is necessarily a good idea.
regards
TDD
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: europe
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there
One has to hand it to WW in his appointment as CEO at "The world's favourite airline". What must be remembered is that Willie's backround is in industrial relations, which will have implications for all in BA.
One should not identify with his past as a pilot. He did very little flying at ALT and virtually never flew after 1990.
Whether one sees him as a grand visionary with an insight as to what future strategic direction BA should take, then rest assured he will have done his homework.
WW as CEO of Aer Lingus had an opportunity to do what no other previous Chief could, and that was to run the company as a going concern.
Willie said in a radio interview once that he knew what needed to be done in Aer Lingus, post Sept. 11 and the foot and mouth outbreak which were the main business killers in 2001.
He got the opportunity and he got the job done. With it has come enormous Kudos and exposure.
While the sun looks magnificent and bright in the distance, up close the violence and destruction become evident.
This is where I believe WW limits are met. He is simply not an organisation builder.
As CEO he is responsible for promoting the culture of the organisation. BA as we know and can read online has been through this cultural transformation before.
To all who sail on the good ship BA, times they are a changing.
Eddington has started his master plan and someone must step up to the plate and continue what has begun.
There is more than a touch of Freud to the start-up operation GO and Eddingtons own strategic plans in the late 90s.
Anyone taking any money on harmonious industrial relations at BA in the foreseeable future?
One has to hand it to WW in his appointment as CEO at "The world's favourite airline". What must be remembered is that Willie's backround is in industrial relations, which will have implications for all in BA.
One should not identify with his past as a pilot. He did very little flying at ALT and virtually never flew after 1990.
Whether one sees him as a grand visionary with an insight as to what future strategic direction BA should take, then rest assured he will have done his homework.
WW as CEO of Aer Lingus had an opportunity to do what no other previous Chief could, and that was to run the company as a going concern.
Willie said in a radio interview once that he knew what needed to be done in Aer Lingus, post Sept. 11 and the foot and mouth outbreak which were the main business killers in 2001.
He got the opportunity and he got the job done. With it has come enormous Kudos and exposure.
While the sun looks magnificent and bright in the distance, up close the violence and destruction become evident.
This is where I believe WW limits are met. He is simply not an organisation builder.
As CEO he is responsible for promoting the culture of the organisation. BA as we know and can read online has been through this cultural transformation before.
To all who sail on the good ship BA, times they are a changing.
Eddington has started his master plan and someone must step up to the plate and continue what has begun.
There is more than a touch of Freud to the start-up operation GO and Eddingtons own strategic plans in the late 90s.
Anyone taking any money on harmonious industrial relations at BA in the foreseeable future?
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mid Atlantic
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Akerosid, what happened was entirely Willys own fault. He lost the run of himself when Tom Mulcahy was forced to step down from his Chairmanship. I am convinced Mulcahy was the only board member who had the clout to put a brake on Willy's ego. Without Mulcahy, he lost the run of himself. How stupid and naiive is that, from someone who was supposed to be a grand-master of the game?
You throw the blame on the unions? The simple fact is that in a semi state business, and in a political environment where the incumbent government has been soundly defeated in a by-election, the unions hand was strong and strengthening. This required care, and cunning from our Willy.
Instead of playing the political game intelligently, Walsh made an elementary mistake. He didn't read the changed political signals - remember Bertie allowed him to lock-out the pilots just 2 years ago- but this time he blabbed his MBO ambitions and handed victory on a plate to his enemies. Didn't he realise that the opposition parties would simply use him as a stick to beat the government with? He put himself in play and was way out of his depth.
As to the new terminal at Dublin. If SIPTU (and IMPACT) get any part of the the action it will be in partnership with the McEvaddys. Now there are guys who can play the political hand! I guarentee you the O'Leary plan will sink like a lead balloon (it is a crap project anyhow in comparison to the McEvaddy one) because, aside from the fact that their project is far better - they have the unions on side. I guarentee you the McEvaddys are good enough at their jobs to make sure the terminal is efficient, and is a success. Individual union members are being invited to borrow funds to invest in the project. Do you think they'll be likely to scuttle it, and lose their investments? No chance!
Its a win-win for the government. Meanwhile O'Leary continues goading and harrassing Bertie...just like Willy tried...the result will be failure for him. Deal done.
Walsh held up Aer Lingus expansion on long-haul routes...and as soon as he was out of the company he sent out rumours that he was starting his own LoCo long haul carrier...on the very routes he stopped ALT from getting onto. The result has been a setback of at least 18 months to 2 years for Aer Lingus, and even though he's no longer in the LoCo carrier market he has damaged Aer Lingus. All for what? He put his own interests (another big bottom line to flash around) against the interests of the company, by blocking expansion. Just one or two A330's could have started the process, but rather than lease on the currently deflated market, he preferred to play stick in the mud and try to intimidate Bertie with telephone number investment demands, hoping the government would drop the whole operation into his lap at a bargain price.
Willy is a one-trick pony. He knows less about BA than ALT and he's no longer playing on home ground.
He might get eaten alive if he doesn't learn from his previous mistakes.
You throw the blame on the unions? The simple fact is that in a semi state business, and in a political environment where the incumbent government has been soundly defeated in a by-election, the unions hand was strong and strengthening. This required care, and cunning from our Willy.
Instead of playing the political game intelligently, Walsh made an elementary mistake. He didn't read the changed political signals - remember Bertie allowed him to lock-out the pilots just 2 years ago- but this time he blabbed his MBO ambitions and handed victory on a plate to his enemies. Didn't he realise that the opposition parties would simply use him as a stick to beat the government with? He put himself in play and was way out of his depth.
As to the new terminal at Dublin. If SIPTU (and IMPACT) get any part of the the action it will be in partnership with the McEvaddys. Now there are guys who can play the political hand! I guarentee you the O'Leary plan will sink like a lead balloon (it is a crap project anyhow in comparison to the McEvaddy one) because, aside from the fact that their project is far better - they have the unions on side. I guarentee you the McEvaddys are good enough at their jobs to make sure the terminal is efficient, and is a success. Individual union members are being invited to borrow funds to invest in the project. Do you think they'll be likely to scuttle it, and lose their investments? No chance!
Its a win-win for the government. Meanwhile O'Leary continues goading and harrassing Bertie...just like Willy tried...the result will be failure for him. Deal done.
Walsh held up Aer Lingus expansion on long-haul routes...and as soon as he was out of the company he sent out rumours that he was starting his own LoCo long haul carrier...on the very routes he stopped ALT from getting onto. The result has been a setback of at least 18 months to 2 years for Aer Lingus, and even though he's no longer in the LoCo carrier market he has damaged Aer Lingus. All for what? He put his own interests (another big bottom line to flash around) against the interests of the company, by blocking expansion. Just one or two A330's could have started the process, but rather than lease on the currently deflated market, he preferred to play stick in the mud and try to intimidate Bertie with telephone number investment demands, hoping the government would drop the whole operation into his lap at a bargain price.
Willy is a one-trick pony. He knows less about BA than ALT and he's no longer playing on home ground.
He might get eaten alive if he doesn't learn from his previous mistakes.
Last edited by Idunno; 12th Mar 2005 at 15:04.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: over the hill
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA "Owning our Future Day" - OOF
My non-flying girlfriend has just seen this "Corporate day", (compulsory days indoctrination for all BA staff), on my roster and asked:
"Whats this then? Some kind of Communist Ra Ra day?!"
Quite appropriate I thought, but on a more serious note, a source close to our new CEO designate, W Squared, states that he regards the whole thing as a total waste of money and wishes to stop it as soon as decently possible.
On a more serious note still, it is said that he regards rumours that he will be setting about the loaders, terminal staff etc etc for efficiencies in a major way as 'laughable'. He is well aware that they could bring the airline to a halt within hours, and so favours a more gradualist approach. Ditto with the cabin crew, who, he says, have been on strike before and who need the gradualist approach too for that reason.
His general view is that all flying staff are inherently lazy, some little better than 'scum' who dont know the meaning of a proper days work. His approach will be to start at the top with the pilots as a way of setting an example to all other work groups.
Bidline is seen as an anachronistic no-no to be got rid of in shorthaul as a matter of urgency. Longhaul to follow. Roster system is to be productivity driven to achieve CAP 371 limits as near as feasible for all flying staff. Medicals and uniforms to be paid for by the staff member, SH food to be on a "pay as you eat" basis, harder to do in longhaul because of 'duty of care concerns' (not sure how that works for LH but not SH, but this is what I am told), car parking to be charged for for all flying staff, new attempts to be made to 'buy-out' people from NAPS.
All LH crew hotels to be on a minimum cost to BA basis contract, SH nightstops to be drastically reduced and hotels for remainder on same basis.
Would like to charge crew for sim conversions to new types if this is as a result of an 'aspirational' bid.
Primary aim = to achieve significant cost savings from the start, begining with the easiest and weakest staff group, the pilots, moving on to Cabin crew next. Pilots = "the low fruit on the tree - easiest to pick-off".
Should be interesting times ahead!
"Whats this then? Some kind of Communist Ra Ra day?!"
Quite appropriate I thought, but on a more serious note, a source close to our new CEO designate, W Squared, states that he regards the whole thing as a total waste of money and wishes to stop it as soon as decently possible.
On a more serious note still, it is said that he regards rumours that he will be setting about the loaders, terminal staff etc etc for efficiencies in a major way as 'laughable'. He is well aware that they could bring the airline to a halt within hours, and so favours a more gradualist approach. Ditto with the cabin crew, who, he says, have been on strike before and who need the gradualist approach too for that reason.
His general view is that all flying staff are inherently lazy, some little better than 'scum' who dont know the meaning of a proper days work. His approach will be to start at the top with the pilots as a way of setting an example to all other work groups.
Bidline is seen as an anachronistic no-no to be got rid of in shorthaul as a matter of urgency. Longhaul to follow. Roster system is to be productivity driven to achieve CAP 371 limits as near as feasible for all flying staff. Medicals and uniforms to be paid for by the staff member, SH food to be on a "pay as you eat" basis, harder to do in longhaul because of 'duty of care concerns' (not sure how that works for LH but not SH, but this is what I am told), car parking to be charged for for all flying staff, new attempts to be made to 'buy-out' people from NAPS.
All LH crew hotels to be on a minimum cost to BA basis contract, SH nightstops to be drastically reduced and hotels for remainder on same basis.
Would like to charge crew for sim conversions to new types if this is as a result of an 'aspirational' bid.
Primary aim = to achieve significant cost savings from the start, begining with the easiest and weakest staff group, the pilots, moving on to Cabin crew next. Pilots = "the low fruit on the tree - easiest to pick-off".
Should be interesting times ahead!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFF
What a load of cr*p! that really doesn't warrant a reply .... but my personal thoughts are that the focus of WW and RE over the next few months will be firmly around the 'Fit for 5' theme.
To that end it will centre around working practises and agreements for ground-based employees, ie check-in staff, engineers, ground transport drivers, loaders and baggage handling in general.
As RE has said before, 'this is our one and only chance to get it right, we are not taking existing working practises to T5'.
Nothing that the pilot community does in the way of working practises needs addressing on the critical path to T5 occupancy. There are some issues around SH cabin crew practises between flights that need visiting, but nothing like those around the ground staff.
It may well be that WW has some thoughts of his own as to the direction he wants BA to move in (he'd be a disappointment if he didn't), and some of the things you mention may be floated, and many will be dismissed as not workable/inappropriate, I suspect that one of he reasons he it work alongside RE for 4-5 months is so that the transition is as seamless as possible. WW at the moment will only just becoming appraised of the juggernaut that is BA.
Your posting really is malevolent garbage.
What a load of cr*p! that really doesn't warrant a reply .... but my personal thoughts are that the focus of WW and RE over the next few months will be firmly around the 'Fit for 5' theme.
To that end it will centre around working practises and agreements for ground-based employees, ie check-in staff, engineers, ground transport drivers, loaders and baggage handling in general.
As RE has said before, 'this is our one and only chance to get it right, we are not taking existing working practises to T5'.
Nothing that the pilot community does in the way of working practises needs addressing on the critical path to T5 occupancy. There are some issues around SH cabin crew practises between flights that need visiting, but nothing like those around the ground staff.
It may well be that WW has some thoughts of his own as to the direction he wants BA to move in (he'd be a disappointment if he didn't), and some of the things you mention may be floated, and many will be dismissed as not workable/inappropriate, I suspect that one of he reasons he it work alongside RE for 4-5 months is so that the transition is as seamless as possible. WW at the moment will only just becoming appraised of the juggernaut that is BA.
Your posting really is malevolent garbage.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a load of garbage. Willie Wonka would not be so daft as to speak his mind at this stage. This is all some fertile mind's imaginings! Not even 'Rumours'. This is fable- don't put words into the man's mouth. You might as well delete this garbage- total waste of time!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: over the hill
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TopBunk - I dont think we are as far apart as you suggest - when, for example is T5 due to start? Some years hence?
If we agree that that is the case then surely, important though it is, the approach to work processes that accompany that move and the efficiencies that are to be gained from it are "gradualist". Hence my saying that the approach to work efficiencies with the staff groups concerned - ramp, bagagge services, dispatch ground handling, terminal staff etc etc will be "gradual" - it will happen as T 5 looms. That is not going to happen either this year or next, however.
W squared has said that he likes it when Ryanair and he are mentioned in the same sentance, and that they are THE competition to beat in the productivity/costbase stakes. OK, you can argue they serve a very different market but the techniques of personel management that have made them so succesful on a financial level are just as applicable to BA.
Sure, this is a pilot RUMOUR network, and I dont have a sworn statement from WW to say - "this is THE plan for my first hundred days" - but my source is very credible.
Ryanair has stripped swathes of cost out of the business. Many of the planned actions mentioned in my first post are but to replicate their way of doing business with their pilots in BA, a way WW is said to admire, which he does because he sees it as cost-effective, and, in BA's case "long overdue".
WW's response to Aer Lingus's problems was to reinvent them as a low cost, on-line majority booking carrier. That was the technique, which involved big cost cuts early on.
OK, BA is a full service carrier, but that does not impede any of the events WW plans, mentioned in my first post, from taking place.
He knows, it is said, that BALPA is the weakest of the unions he faces. This is a union who would have ZERO public support if a strike were called - all he would have to do is publish the salary scales for BA pilots.
This is a union which has been very effectively "ground-down" in an ongoing war of attrition between its own BA Flight Ops departmental managers and the union reps - look at the Attendance Management Process and its effects on the reps involved - look at the unions failure over post-flight bus routings- -look at the muddled ballot over pensions for new starters.
It is so easy too, to "nobble" the leading playersin BALPA. If they have any accrued pesion rights worth a darn, all you have to whisper is -
"go ahead punk, make my day"
i.e. strike and you'll be the first to be sacked and you can kiss your hard-earned pension goodbye.
How else was the ludicrously-worded 'ballot that was not a ballot' about pensions for new starters put out to BA pilots recently and why? The question on the ballot was so indecipherable that no clear result could ever be forthcoming from it, and this was quite deliberate.
WW sees big, easy savings from BALPA and he is going to get them. It will serve "pour encourager les autres", and BALPA will be unable and, ultimately, unwilling to resist. If they weren't going to strike to save a Final Salary Pension for new starters they were never going to strike at all - RE knows that, WW knows that and, in their hearts, BALPA knows it too.
The source says he is looking at ANY measure that takes BA closer to, and ideally way beyond, the magic 10% operating margin. Nothing will block that from being achieved and any thing that will facilitate it will be looked at and implemented as long as it doesn't lead to melt down.
BALPA, WW is said to believe, is a toothless talking shop, that acts a vendor of financial services to its members or as an "accused's best friend" at the many disciplinary-style hearings against its own flight crew that BA has these days - witness the Absence Management Programme.
I accept this cant have the force of a signed statement, but WW has people who know him well from Aer Lingus and they like to talk.
As others have said, it will be interesting.
If we agree that that is the case then surely, important though it is, the approach to work processes that accompany that move and the efficiencies that are to be gained from it are "gradualist". Hence my saying that the approach to work efficiencies with the staff groups concerned - ramp, bagagge services, dispatch ground handling, terminal staff etc etc will be "gradual" - it will happen as T 5 looms. That is not going to happen either this year or next, however.
W squared has said that he likes it when Ryanair and he are mentioned in the same sentance, and that they are THE competition to beat in the productivity/costbase stakes. OK, you can argue they serve a very different market but the techniques of personel management that have made them so succesful on a financial level are just as applicable to BA.
Sure, this is a pilot RUMOUR network, and I dont have a sworn statement from WW to say - "this is THE plan for my first hundred days" - but my source is very credible.
Ryanair has stripped swathes of cost out of the business. Many of the planned actions mentioned in my first post are but to replicate their way of doing business with their pilots in BA, a way WW is said to admire, which he does because he sees it as cost-effective, and, in BA's case "long overdue".
WW's response to Aer Lingus's problems was to reinvent them as a low cost, on-line majority booking carrier. That was the technique, which involved big cost cuts early on.
OK, BA is a full service carrier, but that does not impede any of the events WW plans, mentioned in my first post, from taking place.
He knows, it is said, that BALPA is the weakest of the unions he faces. This is a union who would have ZERO public support if a strike were called - all he would have to do is publish the salary scales for BA pilots.
This is a union which has been very effectively "ground-down" in an ongoing war of attrition between its own BA Flight Ops departmental managers and the union reps - look at the Attendance Management Process and its effects on the reps involved - look at the unions failure over post-flight bus routings- -look at the muddled ballot over pensions for new starters.
It is so easy too, to "nobble" the leading playersin BALPA. If they have any accrued pesion rights worth a darn, all you have to whisper is -
"go ahead punk, make my day"
i.e. strike and you'll be the first to be sacked and you can kiss your hard-earned pension goodbye.
How else was the ludicrously-worded 'ballot that was not a ballot' about pensions for new starters put out to BA pilots recently and why? The question on the ballot was so indecipherable that no clear result could ever be forthcoming from it, and this was quite deliberate.
WW sees big, easy savings from BALPA and he is going to get them. It will serve "pour encourager les autres", and BALPA will be unable and, ultimately, unwilling to resist. If they weren't going to strike to save a Final Salary Pension for new starters they were never going to strike at all - RE knows that, WW knows that and, in their hearts, BALPA knows it too.
The source says he is looking at ANY measure that takes BA closer to, and ideally way beyond, the magic 10% operating margin. Nothing will block that from being achieved and any thing that will facilitate it will be looked at and implemented as long as it doesn't lead to melt down.
BALPA, WW is said to believe, is a toothless talking shop, that acts a vendor of financial services to its members or as an "accused's best friend" at the many disciplinary-style hearings against its own flight crew that BA has these days - witness the Absence Management Programme.
I accept this cant have the force of a signed statement, but WW has people who know him well from Aer Lingus and they like to talk.
As others have said, it will be interesting.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The is a load of nonsence and I should know as I assist in the delivery of the course. The basis is on T5 and the way all BA staff can contribute to cost savings.
The majority of BA staff are hard working and willing but have lacked direction in the last 5 years. Tommy Walsh with his new 'decking' everywhere will address many of these issues including time attendance and work changes after consultation. Do not forget that despite our alleged greed and idelness we are set to report record profitd unlike many of the other outfits that some of you cowboys work for.
The majority of BA staff are hard working and willing but have lacked direction in the last 5 years. Tommy Walsh with his new 'decking' everywhere will address many of these issues including time attendance and work changes after consultation. Do not forget that despite our alleged greed and idelness we are set to report record profitd unlike many of the other outfits that some of you cowboys work for.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But all you have said is conjecture. He would never say this sort of thing anywhere it would get out. I think it never happened! This is embellished bar room talk.
One thing is certain- BA needs a savage shaking, and this man has been appointed to do it. Otherwise we all know the business is going one way. We know where the inefficiencies are. Pilots have been benchmarked- I think they can look to other staff groups to be so done too.
One thing is certain- BA needs a savage shaking, and this man has been appointed to do it. Otherwise we all know the business is going one way. We know where the inefficiencies are. Pilots have been benchmarked- I think they can look to other staff groups to be so done too.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Abroad
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Might be an idea to publish the pay scales...every one I know thinks BA guys are paid 200 K a year. They'd be shocked if they knew the lowest paid person on the Airbus is often the F/O. Or at least it was when I was on shorthaul.