BAMANAGER

SelfishFlyer, L337 and PartickThistle, your committment to the company makes me weep into my Latte. Rock on, there is at least 3 of you working to save the mothership. Give me a nudge when it's all over, you'll find me skiving at one of our many coffee shacks in waterside. You see I've borrowed all these books from the quest centre on writing a great CV, very busy planning my escape!

slip and turn

I don't quite know what to make of your sentiments overall, BAM, because when I saw SeLFish's very telling observations from his Sunday working in T5, I instantly thought, yep, there's some old-stager / supervisor-level-little-Hitlers in there that are evidence of rotten tails wagging dogs. I don't think I even mean people as high as junior management, but I wouldn't be surprised if some have made it that far over the years.

Now if I am right, it is evidence of a lot of (not just some) poor management higher up too.

In all your different guises in this thread and the others, I do still think that once or twice you have done the aviation industry a service by keeping the threads afloat, but nevertheless I am assuming you might be one of the rotten tails I am talking about.

I am not sure it is a good defence for a rotten tail to say well it was my dog's management that made me feel the way I do, although I can sympathise to a large extent. But it can't go on. Are you part of the problem or part of the solution or have you abdicated but are still taking the salary and letting others not in your clique take the strain as it appears you are saying in your last post?

Trouble is, you see, BA is in such a mess right now as a result of so many transparently exasperated staff and customers that I am not sure anyone can fix it except teams of staff who can be trusted a little bit further than to organise their own tea breaks fairly and sensibly and to make sure their carpark manoeuvres are not an excuse just to slope off for 90 minutes, rather than create nice little tickles for their clique of mates.

I sincerely hope no BA Engineers (which was one title I believe you assumed on PPRuNe) are acting like that, because if an engineer sloped off or buggered around with what should largely be a self-organised self-disciplined day, then I wonder what else he couldn't give a FF about when no-one is holding his hand or has a ring through his nose and a rope on it to remind him who's in charge?

It's so bad, that there seem to be a lot of staff that I would not trust to be part of my aviation experience right now. From what I read about moral, and internal bitching, BA pilots arguing for goodness knows what via BALPA, all coupled with the overall T5 Project disaster-recovery pressures, I do not believe that all the necessary work can possibly be still being done to keep every aspect of this airline safe.

And I seriously wonder what the CAA are doing about it.

Or maybe there's plenty of slack in everyone's day to argue, slag off, slope off and play musical chairs with cars in the car park, as well as actual work?

Sunfish

This thread appears to be degenerating into a "management versus entrenched unions." thread. Frankly, passengers don't care which one of you it was that messed up T5. The outcome is the same no matter who is to blame.

Frankly, I blame management because I find the allegations of union demarcation mess ups and feather bedding extremely weak. For one reason and one reason alone. You have had five years to plan the composition of your T5 workforce, their tasks, duty statements, job rosters, rotations, work practices, new technology, training, the lot, and you have had five years to negotiate any demarcation issues and work practice issues relating to your T5 workforce with the associated unions.

To put it another way, by blaming unions you are opening yourself to a charge of incompetence as managers, for you had ample time to negotiate changes. I am, by the way, speaking from experience.

To put it another way, your idea that the T5 debacle involves "Union sabotage" is fanciful, and in any case you had five years to prevent it.

As for preceding comments about experienced managers criticisms being sidelined, I've seen it all before. I now know that the smart thing to do when your criticism is rejected is to sit back and watch the young managers fall flat on their backside, then either move in and take their jobs or wait for them to humbly ask for your assistance.

hunterboy

It does make you wonder what they have been doing for the last five years...apart from trousering close to 250K a year each as Directors . Actually, that is a rhetorical question. I have a pretty good idea what they have been doing.

Joetom

A little drift, but interesting about the car parks.

In terminals 1234, approx 80% of airline staff park outside the airport (remote parking) the other 20% use the terminal car parks due lenght of service or job T+Cs allow them to.

At about 18.00 every day, all staff can then use the terminal car parks, this means when they finnish work, they can get to their car quick and save 15/25mins of their own time and get home to walk the dog.

Problem is, when all these staff move their cars during shift time, they are not doing their job and they help clogging up the roads and terminal car parks.

T5, all staff park remote and they can't get their cars into the T5 car park unless they pay, so the company is very happy now, many staff will be unhappy with this set up.

VAFFPAX

Just FYI - You can plan all you like for five years, but if your planning's wrong, then it won't save you from a fiasco when your shiny new terminal opens. Then it comes down to flying-by-the-pants, i.e. being pro-active and being able to take charge and come up with a plan on short notice.

S.

CHINOOKER

If anyone wants to know what has happened at BA to make it such a shambles of late,perhaps this will give you an idea of what most of us have to put up with on most days......Today i was one of a team of engineers at base awaiting the tow of a B777 from T4. The aircraft in question was due a pre-input "engineering wash" on the stand designated for this work. As we sat there awaiting it's arrival we suddenly realised that the towing crew were actually starting to position it on an adjacent stand!......Que my AMS,(supervisor),leaping around,arms waving in the air trying to get the tow crew to stop and reposition the aircraft onto the correct stand....All to no avail.
On walking over to the next stand,we were approached by one of the tow team...."the computer tells us that this a/c has to go on TA3 mate,so that's where we have to put it". "Well we need it on TA4 says our AMS,as thats the only stand that an engineering wash can be done"......."no problem says the tug driver,we can put it there for you,but ONLY when the computer says we can"!!. Now que the wash team supervisor running over to the a/c..."what the **** you parking this here for,this has to be washed....it has to go on the stand next door". "Sorry mate says the tug driver,(computer in hand),it says on here stand 408 to TA3....we have to work to the computer or we get a bollocking". By now 10 minutes has elapsed and six engineers and a complete aircraft wash team,(8 men and 4 wash trucks), are sitting around "twiddling thier thumbs".....Now que our boss,running around doing his daily "headless chicken" impersonation......."what have you parked that there for,...it has to go on the stand next door"!!........."Computer says nah" says the tug driver,"you had better get back onto the TRM to have the stand changed"...que our boss now legging it at speed back to his office to make the call........after about another 15 minutes "hey presto",the computer says "yes" and the tug crew reposition the a/c,(in about 5 minutes),to the correct stand!!.
On talking afterwards to the tug crew,they complained bitterly that the introduction of the computer system has taken "all flexibility" out of thier operation,so they now "just do as they are instructed" until instructed otherwise!!.......The same seems to go for many front line staff nowadays who are constantly becoming fed up /dissolusioned by constant change most of which is bought about by managers etc who "have to make changes" in order to meet thier own KRA,s KPI,s etc etc
This little episode today equates to 16 people sitting around for 30 or so minutes each awaiting for one persons decision.....If this sort of scenario is enacted right across the airline on a daily basis,god only knows how much time and money is wasted!!.......If only BA could get it's act together and stop putting "idealogical obstacles" in everyones way,then forget 10%......we could get that with our eyes shut!!

r75

Ews + Sap = Chaos?!

Sunfish

Chinooker the reason for your frustration (absent some purely technical trouble like failure to update a database etc.) is an anomaly in what's called the "business rules" in IT speak, to whit, there should be a business rule that says that the aircraft can't be in two places at once, nor destined for two different destinations at once.

Of course the best part is that when this apparent computer anomaly is brought to the attention of the IT people, some very well spoken consultants in very nice suits and pastel ties will tell BA (or BAA) firstly that its their fault because they specified the business rules, and that fixing this "undocumented feature" of the system will cost a minimum of 750,000 pounds and take a minimum of six months (to allow for testing of course) to fix.

Of course that's if it doesn't require a complete redesign of the system.

The beauty of delivering large complex computer systems to companies and Governments is that the business rules will change faster than the software people will deliver (they like it that way), so with a bit of nifty footwork, there are always a string of changes necessary to accommodate changed work practices and the software firm is on the gravy train for life.

I've worked on both sides of one of these types of deals and I have the scars to prove it.

slip and turn

If what CHINOOKER has said is true then it makes me want to cry, and I have nothing to do with BA or the aviation industry. I just hold a British passport and enjoy old Ealing Studios type movies for nostalgia's sake.

That means I still smile at Peter Sellers in "I'm All Right Jack", and I still smile when I think of how it was when my father used to come home 40 years ago and tell us what a foul-up the new computer system had caused at his blue chip employer's premises , but frowned when he told us when he was most likely next to not be going to work because so and so and the shop stewards had called another strike ...

But now, in 2008, it just makes me want to weep for this country.

...I'll get my coat.

Would the last one leaving please turn out the lights.

Blink182

Can concur with Chinooker.........

Many, many, many hundreds of engineering manhours lost just waiting for aircraft to be towed to base . One time we investigated, the slowness was due to "shortage of towing crews ".............a quick look in their crewroom revealed plenty of 'em !

Of course, in the dim and distant past , we were allowed to go get the aircraft ourselves with an Engineering tug crew .....or even more bizarely we used to Taxi the aircraft back to the Hangar ( this is LGW , mind )...

Don't do this anymore .....it upsets the tuggies......

CHINOOKER

Sunfish,I hear what you are saying,but it's not rocket science were talking about here....the daily a/c fleet position sheet,(which is basically our guide to what arrives and when and what time it's due out again)is available to all ramp planners etc...these people also have an insight to any maintenance that a particular a/c is due and so a simple mistake,(if that is what this was),should not happen!
It's just not occurences like this one that tend to get the staff,(and to some extent our local managers),scratching thier heads in total dis-belief on a day to day basis......If anyone could explain to us why almost every hangar input my section handles,be it 747/777,the aircraft comes in with the cabin "dressed ready for service",...when everybody in the loop should know that we are going to have to inspect all the seating/ife.......We have no option but to place everything in the overhead bins only for the cleaners to do it all over again!!
In BA's new world,where it seems everybody has to be "tracked/monitored and directed" by computers etc,we seem to have lost the simple ability of communicating with each other! What,s wrong with the good old..."hey guys,park that a/c there......don,t bother dressing that one,as the engineers are going to rip it apart"!! This simple approach to communication has worked fine for hundreds of years...If it aint broken,why try and fix it!!

Sunfish

The cause of this Mr. Chinook, is that your management doesn't have detailed knowledge of that which they seek to manage. Therefore they design systems and procedures they way they think the system should work, not the way it actually works.

Any challenge by you will be dismissed as special pleading. Haven't you ever seen the knowing looks exchanged between managers when someone gets up and says "We've tried that before and it doesn't work"?

But it's worse than that. If you challenge their theoretical knowledge with practical experience, at best you are ignored, at worst you are fired for "being part of the problem." People with hands on knowledge are frequently seen as a threat to them by management who only have an MBA to hide behind. Please don't try and point out the absurdity of what is happening to management, you will not be thanked and may instead be marked for retribution for your temerity.

P.S. Of course I didn't mention that other addictive drug Managers dream about - total control and surveillance of all workplace activity. This is usually peddled by consultants who do wonderful presentations about how their systems allow you to "drill down" and see exactly who is doing what to whom and where and when during working hours. I call it keyboard voyeurism. They think it absolves them from the necessity of contacting lower forms of humanity to find out what they are actually doing. I'm amazed that you are not yet all issued a GPS suppository.

WHBM

This is all very disappointing. Because as one of those
it is apparent that here were a group of guys, the engineers, the tug driver, etc, all actually wanting to do a good and sensible job, yet who were frustrated by the quite counter-intuitive "procedures" they had been told must be followed.

Now if I was designing it I would have a repeater of the information at the engineering base so the team could see, in advance, what was coming where so they could jump in and get errors sorted out. People not envisaging errors, clashes, etc, and how to overcome them immediately are one of the banes of the business world. I am afraid many such projects suffer by being put out to the lowest bidder, someone higher up the chain feeling that is all that is important.

pasoundman

And THAT is very much what I associate with the dreaded MBAs. They are AIUI taught that they don't NEED to know such things in order to manage. The craziest concept ever in my simple little mind.

VAFFPAX

Well, the people on the ground are usually the last people asked about how things should work. Because after all, all they'd want is for the system to continue working the way it does, inefficiency and all (not my words). That's one thing that has always frustrated me in a consultative role - Being prevented from talking to the people who are actually supposed to USE the system. Instead everything is streamlined to be as efficient as possible for backoffice or managerial staff instead of those who are exposed to it on the proverbial coalface. That's why several government projects have been utter fiascos - No input from the boys and girls working the phones and working in the offices, or, worse, input from them blatantly disregarded because after all "what do they know".

*UGH*

S.

Curious Pax

Aren't you missing the point by blaming the IT systems? Would I be right in thinking that in the example given, at some point someone somewhere has input stand TA3 instead of TA4 into the system? In many ways the fact that it was an IT system is irrelevant, as it could have been hand written on a piece of paper.

The problem is that the managers of the tug drivers have hammered home to them (bullied?) that any deviation from the instructions they are given will result in a b*llocking, which the tug drivers naturally wish to avoid. The problem can only be solved by someone with the authority to change the stand in the system Chinooker's manager it seems), which then results in a revised instruction to the crew, which they are then happy to carry out.

As has been said previously the management method generally in BA seems to be to robotize their workers as far as possible, which is probably why as soon as anything unusual happens (fog, snow, T5 etc) the whole thing falls apart, because those lower down the food chain aren't allowed to improvise.

Having read Gordon Bethune's book 'From Worst to First' it all sounds very similar to the dark days at Continental that he was instrumental in overturning - perhaps the BA board ought to give him a call and see what he is doing these days!

Things will never be perfect at a large company, as you will never get perfect top-to-bottom communication, but there are ways of making it a lot better than it seems to be in BA at present.

Sunfish

WHBM:

"I would have a repeater of the information at the engineering base so the team could see,"............

But no! Then they might challenge my authority!

"what was coming where so they could jump in and get errors sorted out. People not envisaging errors, clashes, etc, and how to overcome them immediately are one of the banes of the business world...."

What errors? I don't make errors, if I did I'd hide them from you anyway! Nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong.

"I am afraid many such projects suffer by being put out to the lowest bidder,"

There is no way this project went to the lowest bidder...at least not when the variations and customisation is added tot he cost. I've watched the boys and girls from Accenture turn a low bid of $20 million into a $40 million project.

Vaffpax:

No, No, No, Vaffy, the people on the ground will only tell you how things work now, they won't tell you how things should work once we have had a bit of business process re-engineering in our fevered dreams. Only management can tell you that.

....Of course they don't have to make the system work in a rainstorm at 2.00 am in winter.

Curious:

I'm not blaming the IT systems. I'm blaming the prats who didn't test for the absurdity in the IT system that Chinook pointed out. Then there are the prats who established the business rules for the IT system concerned. If it was finger trouble by someone, somewhere, Why didn't the IT system flag the absurdity of an aircraft being required in two different places at the same time? That's what IT systems are good at.

The reason that these foul-ups always happen is always the same - managers viewing their staff as part of the problem and not part of the solution. Hence when they voice concerns or try and contribute their experience to the design of a new project it's regarded as "special pleading' and their input is then ignored.

How do I know this? Because as a young and impressionable MBA, I was hired as a Group General Manager for a reasonably large software solution provider because I had no experience of mainframe computer systems - and was not "contaminated" by mainframe/cobol ways of doing things - this was seen as a big plus by the Directors of the company!........Needless to say I was out of there in 18 months with my tail between my legs, when it became obvious to all that I hadn't the faintest idea what I was doing and the Directors view of what the business required was a fantasy..

WHBM

Only double ? Gosh, when they were part of Arthur Andersen it would usually be four times at least. Lost their touch, I suppose.

BAMANAGER

WILLIE WALSH QUOTE: (FROM TELEGRAPH 3MAR2008)BA has exclusive use of T5 and it is the new terminal’s almost completely automated baggage system that has really engaged Walsh’s attention. His staff have been testing the system continuously since August 2006 and he admits to having “spent more time on the ramp-side looking at the baggage infrastructure than I did out here in the main terminal. Really, what we have here is an extremely sophisticated baggage system with a terminal built around it. Believe me, what we have is a big step forward.”