British Airways: risk of turbulence on Willie Walsh’s flight path

[411A]

You don't seem to understand that there will be a strike if BA recruit a single cabin crew on a a contract with different terms and conditions to the agreed ones now.

BA managment are not the brightest of the people in the world but they are not stupid and they know thay are playing with fire.

I understand all too well, eagle21.
BA engages an outside agency.
Said outside agency does the recruiting, IE: nothing to do with BA at the time.
Then, when necessary, this outside agency offers CC on a contractual monthly basis to BA.
An Air Atlanta recruitment type of operation.

BA CC would be very foolish to expect BA management to not try to trim expenses in every way possible.
CC wages are certainly ripe for this.
Having said this, BA management would also be well advised to look in their own area, in order to weed out un-needed ' middle management' personel.
Trim the fat there as well, as I suspect it is long overdue.
Gotta start sometime, now is as good a time as any.

[rubik101]

Eagle asks; What makes BA?
I'm afraid his or her answer is as far wide of the mark as it is possible to be. BA, like any company, is shaped by the management, however incompetent, and the demands of the shareholders. If survival means that BA becomes RYR MkII then that is what it will take to keep the pilots, cabin crew etc. in work.
Strike as long and hard as you like; look what happened to the all powrful (sic!) print unions, the steel industry, the mineworkers et al in the 80s.
Wake up to the real world before you are swept away in the tide of change coming to an airline near you in the near future.

[jetset lady]

Right, I wasn't going to join this discussion but....

Poof in Boots, you totally deserved that response from Monty77. Your comments were ill thought out and bang out of order. However, Monty77, while I appreciate you probably replied in anger, IMHO, you went too far. Please do not assume all CC have the same attitude. I would say PiB is in the minority.

eagle21, do you not think BA will have thought through the likely result if they were to put a plan, such as subbing crew out, into action? Believe me, they will have planned ahead and regardless of what we think, no single group of staff will ever be able to bring an airline the size of BA down. As for there being a strike if BA hire any cabin crew on different T&C's, they already are. Not even taking into account LGW, how about Open Skies? I said before that they are as much a threat, if not more so, to CC as they are to our flight crew and I'll say it again now. How do we know how many are being trained up?

411A, what is it like up there on your podium of total knowledge and righteousness? It must be fantastic to know that you are always right and everyone else is "foolish"!

Sorry to interrupt. I'll go back to my own threads now...

Jsl

[411A]

...podium of total knowledge and righteousness?

Quite nice, thank you very much.

However, as I have been in the airline business for over forty years, I've seen it all before.
The young'uns (especially the younger militant ones) expect they have thought of everything.
All I can do is laugh my socks off at that thought.
BA management will roll over 'em like a runaway steam roller on a warm summer day.

Splat.

[Poof in Boots]

I didn't see the response by Monty.

Just because a cabin crew union is strong, protects its members interests and ensures they have good pay and conditions, the Flight Crew here say that it is "militant". It's about time that they did a better job of standing up to predatory management.

We need to be protected from idiotic management who waste millions on big ideas like ethnic tailfins. Who gave Ayling that thought? McKinsey.

Unfortunately Willie Walsh is an embarrassment to the pilot community,a
former IALPA rep who is now out to shaft BA Flight Crew. How many ex BALPA reps are now in BA management?

What a shower!

411A:

If you list many of the larger airlines that have gone bust in the last 30 years, in virtually all cases it was due to bad management.

PAN AM: Ordered too many 747's it couldn't fill/Lockerbie caused by security lapses through management not having a policy in place to screen interline bags. BA as an example did screen all hold baggage at that time. PAN AM management were just trying to save money, but were charging their passengers for enhanced security they didn't receive.

LAKER: Thought he was clever having his aircraft loans in U$ until the Pound almost went par

EASTERN: Sold in 1986 to Frank Lorenzo, who was named by TIME magazine as one of the 10 worst bosses of the 20th century. Labour unrest caused this airline to fail.

BRANIFF: CEO Lawrence Harding expanded the airline too fast during deregulation and it went bust.

SWISSAIR: In the 1990s Swissair initiated the Hunter Strategy, a major expansion program devised by the consulting firm of McKinsey & Co.
The criminal trial began January 16, 2007 in Bülach. The entire Swissair management board stood facing criminal charges of mismanagement, false statements, and forgery of documents. Top defendants in the trial were Mario Corti, Philippe Bruggisser, George Schorderet, Jacqualyn Fouse, Eric Honegger and Vrena Spoerry. Corti, Honegger and Spoerry entered statements proclaiming their innocence.


McKinsey were advising BA in the late 90's and were responsible for the 'Tailfin' fiasco.

[lord mash]

Flights cant go anywhere without cabin crew, just as fuel tankers dont go anywhere without fuel tanker drivers. Shell caved in and gave the tanker drivers what they wanted so why shouldnt cabin crew stand up for what they want when under threat of worse terms and conditions. If it was really true that cabin crew are ten a penny then why are so many rejected by BA even before getting to interview stage?

[Tiger]

I`ve said several times before regards to 411A don`t entertain. The person dislikes BA, BA cabin crew for whatever reason. Right or wrong every time BA cabin crew on pprune this person is so anti. Its almost like the ex partner was cabin crew and guns them down everytime.
Whatever the out come 411A will be there won`t you?

oh and I do wonder to the regards of the USA state.

[virgo]

411A........."BA management will roll 'em over like a runaway steam roller"

I don't think an American would know what a "steam roller " was..........are you a closet Englishman ????

[Tiger]

411A...

Aer Lingus trio's investment plan
Friday, 2 July 2004

Three senior members of the Aer Lingus management team, including chief executive Willie Walsh, have asked Transport Minister Seamus Brennan to allow them to develop what they describe as an investment proposal for the company.

A statement from the three - Mr Walsh, chief financial officer Brian Dunne and chief operations officer Seamus Kearney - said they had also advised the Aer Lingus board of their request.

The statement also said they would 'fully comply and co-operate with any specific corporate governance procedures put in place.'
Advertisement


Aer Lingus's has been transformed in the last couple of years into a profit-making low cost carrier.

Legislation brought in last year allows the Minister for Finance to sell his Aer Lingus shares but beyond that, no firm way forward has been agreed at the Cabinet table.

This evening, a spokesman for Transport Minister Seamus Brennan said the letter from Aer Lingus raised issues of corporate governance, potential conflicts of interest, and transparency, adding that it had raised the spectre of a management buy-out.

The biggest union at Aer Lingus, SIPTU, has repeated its opposition to any privatisation of the company.

SIPTU's national industrial secretary, Michael Halpenny, said that the first it had heard of plans by senior management to arrange a buy-out of the airline was in media reports this evening.

Mr Halpenny added that the commercial viability of Aer Lingus had been delivered by the sacrifices of the workforce.


... and it never happened!!! He got sacked!

[marlowe]

Bacityflyer cabin crew are on the worst terms and conditions in the BA group fact! But the terms and conditions they are on are the basis for what BA would like to bring in for mainline crew .When the new terms and conditions were introduced 15 months ago there was no consultation with crew just an imposed set of conditions, take them or goodbye. BASSA need to to start looking at this fully owned subsidary and opening their eyes to the fact that this company have been the testing ground for BA to try out different little rules and regs and seeing what they can get away with, for the last 15 months a group of BA workers have been effectivly denied union recognition by the company, they have used every excuse not to get involved with a union. When it was BAConnect there was union recognition with Amicus but that ended with the formation of flyer .The unions need to realise that the seeds for the future T&Cs in mainline are already cultivating elsewhere in the company .

[GS-Alpha]

I don't see what BA cabin crew can do to avoid Columbus.

BASSA have already allowed temporary contract cabin crew. BA simply need to make all future cabin crew recruitment temporary contract. Then when numbers are great enough, and their contracts expire, they are offered jobs with the new outfit. When mainline cabin crew strike, the new outfit has sufficient numbers to keep the operation going, and the action will be rendered impotent. It is precisely for this reason that BA pilots were/are worried about Openskies. BA already has it's openskies for the cabin crew, through the acceptance of Gatwick T'c and C's and also the ability to recruit temporary contract crews. And now BA has it's Openskies; to play the same trick on the pilots.

Each scheme will take a little bit of time, but reduction in flight and cabin crew T's and C's within BA is going to happen, whether we like it or not.

[eagle21]

Well it would take at leat 24 years since BA have around 14000 cabin crew, they training capabilities would be bout 50 new entrants every 5 weeks. To keep the operation going you need at least 75% of the 14000 so 10500 new entrants at 50 every 6 weeks you need 1260 weeks to complete this plan with a full speed training department so it is not as easy as you may think.
.
Some people here have no idea of the numbers they are talking about, that is because they have never worked for BA in the first instance

[bermudatriangle]

411A seems a very anti union/anti decent pay and conditions type character.his laughable proposal to train an army of cabin crew who are waiting in the wings,to take the place of BA's current workforce if they fail to agree to some new contract is rediculous.does he realise BA employ about 14,000 cabin crew.just how long does he think it would take to prepare such a workforce and how would they gain any online experience ? any proposals to save costs have to be agreed by both sides in a fair and sensible approach,which recognises the needs of the business to remain profitable and therefore be able to offer secure employment,balanced with the needs of the employess to earn a living wage.this has always worked in the past and i am sure will work in the future.

[JennyB]

Eagle21,

Are you saying that BA can make a immediate saving by getting rid of 3500 cabin crew and still be able to operate all routes?

If you know as crew that you are overstaffed, sure that BA management do too

[Bedder believeit]

The biggest industrial mistake one can make is to think that that they irreplaceable. Just ask the PATCO controllers in the early 80's and the resigning pilots of ANSETT and Australian Airlines in 1989.

[PAXboy]

eagle21

BA cabin crew would prefer to shut down the airline rather than give up, why? Because they don't have much to loose, specially the newer ones( a majority).

Actually, they have their jobs to lose. As the recession really bites in 2009, you may expect that people will start to think twice about going on strike.

What makes BA? It's pilots, crew , ground staff and little more.

From one perspective that may be true but, in fact, it is the majority shareholders and the main board. They set policy to achieve certain financial targets. If those targets are not met, then shareholders may withdraw, then the company share price falls and - if it continues - they become a take over target.

Merge or die? Larger groups will usually draw larger financial backing to weather out the storms of recession and strikes.

Naturally, no one can guess if they will succeed in reducing costs and improving their image but I expect that, when the end does come for BA, it's financial collapse will be frighteningly sudden - within months. I do not expect that for another couple of years and it may be avoided. So, perhaps: Reduce costs, Merge or Die.

[rubik101]

History lessons?

eagle 21, you, amongst others, seem to conveniently ignore the facts that you read here, or not perhaps, as the case may be. As an example, ignored by you in earlier posts, check on the history of Fleet Street in the 1980s. The print unions had full support from their members, full support from the TUC, full support and sympathy strikes from other unions, Health workers, Transport drivers, Electricians and many others.
During many months of strikes, costing the members and the TUC many millions of pounds, the newspapers, particularly The Times and Sunday Times, never missed an issue. The papers were written, printed and distributed from new offices in Wapping.
Consider also how the T&Cs of well established and apparently aspirational airlines, Cathay Pacific, American, et al, have been eroded over the past several years. Consider the success of the LoCos, however distasteful that may be to dyed in the wool BA employees.
If you think that BA, or any other airline for that matter, is bigger and stronger than the Print Unions thought they were in 1982, think again.
The die has been cast already, with Gatwick T&Cs and Open Skies already established. The remainder of you will be on the new T&Cs before too long, either by seismic shift or Chinese water torture but in a few years, BA will have the airline they want. They will have an airline which can survive in the new era of tight control, restricted T&Cs, expensive fuel, and selective customers who have to watch their traveling budgets.
If you think that during a recession that pilots, cabin crew and engineers will not work under newly enforced conditions, think again. The need to pay your mortgage, school fees, petrol and food etc. will far outweigh any feelings of solidarity with colleagues who are holding out for the 'good times' of old.
Oil prices ($143.00), banking collapses, deflation/stagflation/inflation, negative equity, bankrupt Governments, weak political leadership along with many other calamities about to befall us, lead to the conclusion that any airline that survives will only do so by drastic and deep cuts and changes. BA will need to be foremost among those implementing these changes or it will be the first of many to cease operations.
History has a good purpose: study and learn and see the future. It is not rocket science, just simple observation and valid conclusion.
Sadly, the Ostriches, and you know who you are, still survive but then the real Ostriches are on the same T&C since they first trod the plains many millions of years ago!
Join the 21st Century, bled by Labour, (pun intended) along with the rest of us.

[GS-Alpha]

eagle21

I would be amazed if BA facilities are only capable of training a maximum of 50 new entrant cabin crew every 5 to 6 weeks, but I admit that I have no idea what the max-chat training rate would be. You also need to remember that they are not necessarily confined to the current facilities either.

BA crew were recently polled to see how many want part time. BA could easily allow everyone that wants it, part time. To cope with this, they would have to up recruitment. BASSA would likely agree that all recruitment could be on temp contract to cover the lost man-power units, because BA could argue that they need to have the flexibility to offload crew if the part-timers change their mind and want to come back full time.

Once all the expensive ones are part-time, BA's costs are reduced. At the same time, a strike by a load of 50% part timers will only do half the damage.

[HZ123]

Gosh calm down everyone it seems as if the 'managing conflict' has not worked as well as it should. At Cranebank it is easy to recruit and train 100 NECC a month and this figure could be replicated at LGW. Futhermore of the 5-6 weeks training it is realised that only 10 days are required to meet mandated CAA requirmernts. To supplement Line trainers it would be easy to utilise Customer Service trainers and airport operations trainers to work alongside CC line trainers an idea that has been looked at a number of times. To assist in this there would be any number of retired staff willing to return to take on temporary roles.

When we scoped for T5 associate trainers (contractors) we were inundated with applications. I doubt it is going to happen as even the drip feed of new joiners now is beset with problems. Uniform, CRO checks and general chaos that exists in a sixties building are more than enough to cope with.

On another point already mentioned WW did indeed want to convert ALingus to a LoCo and dress most staff in jeans and casual shirts/blouses. That did not come of either but i fear he has a still time to make some major changes at BA.

[Glamgirl]

Just a couple of things...

Eagle21 - You say we have 14000 cabin crew. That is more or less correct. However, we don't have 14000 full time cc. 38% of ww crew are part time, 40 something % of ef crew are part time and a large group of part time contracts at SFLGW. So, even though the head count is 14000, we don't need that amount of crew to operate.

There are possibilities of "fast track" training for experienced crew (like the exGB crew who came over). Also, there is the availability of operating flights with fewer crew members than in the t&c's, "due to operational requirements", which the company can throw in if a strike should happen.

Also, I think some unions (no names mentioned) and their members scream STRIKE! at the drop of a hat sometimes. What happened to good old negotiations? Instead of going to meetings with arms folded and "we're not doing this/that/the other" attitude and thinking strike if they don't get what they want, they should go to meetings with a fairly open mind and be willing to DISCUSS and negotiate with management. That is traditionally (in the real world) how problems are solved.

I'm getting tired of reading about what Ayling did, what happened in 92,97, last year and so on. That is all in the past, we need to look to the future.

Before I get my head virtually kicked in (as such), I'm not saying that I enjoy the Colombus issue one bit. I don't want my contract changed (not that it's worth much anyway), but I understand that with the fuel prices and the rise of the cost of living (fewer people able to fly for a start) the company must reduce costs somehow. Yes, management should take a hit too, no doubt about it, but they need to look at ALL departments. If they didn't, they would be even more stupid than most people think they are already.

We are easily replaced, as there are so many behind us in the queue. Yes, a lot of our crew are outstanding crew members who were born for the job and love it no matter how long they've been in the company (myself included), but there is unfortunately a too high a number of crew who are "trapped" in the job (as no other job in the outside world would pay that amount of money for the lifestyle), they're miserable, don't trust management and don't provide good/great service to our customers. Those are the crew who give us a bad name, and we need to get rid of those. Sounds harsh, maybe, but that's how I feel. (This also applies for other departments, just to keep that clear).

Gg