ALL airlines have these few, and they should be shown the door in an accelerated manner, for they give all the rest of well-serving CC a bad name and reputation.

Period.

Unite on alert over threat to BA jobs amid fears of severe cost-cutting
 

Poof in Boots,

For the record, I've been flying with BA for 10 years. I'm not a manager, nor will I ever be one. I am a purser and happy with that.

You say about forward bookings for the next few months and winter. Yes, our flights may be full now, but most of these tickets were probably booked and paid for before the whole recession thing started kicking off (as in people and company actually realising it wasn't just a blip on the stock market).

If the oil price and recession doesn't slow down, our future bookings (next year etc) will look grim. Something for you to consider, I suppose, although I'm sure you will tell me (very shortly) how wrong I am and to wind my neck in.

Gg

Thats not quite true actually. It later emerged (by admission to the media from senior managers after his departure) that part of Walsh's agenda was to decrease employee numbers by using what was termed 'Environmental Push Factors' to persuade people to leave of their own accord. EPF was used in many ways, according to the area/department, but for Cabin Crew the rumour (and thats all it ever was - a rumour!) was put out by management that they were planning to dress up the Cabin Crew in jeans and t-shirts.

I guess some people actually have sufficient belief in what management tell them, to take everything they hear as absolute truth. Even just a rumour. No doubt such people believe that management never lie, and wouldn't stoop to such infantile behaviour as deliberate rumour mongering.

But the fact is - they do. HE does.
Keep it in mind.;)

Gg, every few years we get a new CEO and crop of managers who think they have reinvented the wheel. I can remember all the stupid things our senior managers have done over the years, some of them forgotten like putting secondhand ex Eastern Airlines engines on our new 757's when Eastern upgraded to E4's. Shortermism to make the bottom line look better for their bonuses.

Many here will agree that the airline business is cyclical. Sometimes completely unexpected events like 9/11 will shock the industry. A well managed airline will have something put away for a rainy day to overcome the fallout and subsequent drop in bookings. BA at the moment is awash with cash; it has huge reserves. It has not gone on a ridiculous spending spree for new aircraft, although there are a few are in the pipeline like nice economical 777's. VIRGIN will fail before us, lumbered with his "Four Engines For Longhaul" A340-600's.

Another point to remember is that as other airlines go bust, we will pick up some of the business. I wonder how many ex-OASIS, Silverjet, EOS and MaxJet passengers are now travelling with BA? So it is not all doom and gloom for BA and the industry.

You are obviously quite prepared to sacrifice your T&C's to help Mr Walsh and his team enhance the profitability of BA and their bonuses. Why don't you criticise BA management over the £350m that has been wasted on fuel surcharge fines, plus the damage to our reputation. What about the T5 debacle? Already brushed under the carpet in your mind.

Apparently Walsh is trying to sue BALPA over damage to reputation caused by the Opensewer row.This is the sort of person we are dealing with and people like you give him succour when they read your comments. Most of the staff of BA only got .8 of a weeks bonus pay, whilst Walsh and other Directors get 100%. They are motivated by greed. It is a very profitable airline even in the current climate and present T&C's of employees. Why accept less? Walsh's pay has already gone up £35,000 and he wants you to take less. Why don't we tell him where to stick his Project Columbus?

We have already had a post here about Walsh at Aer Lingus attempting a management buy out. He is all for himself, hence a union rep one moment and management the next.

You will still be in the job long after Walsh is gone. Please don't try and make his job too easy for him and let your colleagues down in the process, as if this is all inevitable. Try and put up a little bit of opposition. You will feel much better for it.

As a passenger contemplating a long haul flight and living outside the greater London area I would not even consider flying with BA. The reasons are as follows

1. Airport Comfort. One cannot compare the likes of LHR to AMS etc.

2. Service ethic. Airport employees on the continent are much more polite and helpfull than those at LHR.

3. Tax. Why pay 2 sets of airport tax.

4. I have not lost my bags using the likes of KLM/Air France whereas both times I have used BA recently I have.

5. Reliability. I was delayed on my return last time when BA cancelled the Domestic leg of my journey.

6. In flight service vrs cost. The complementary sandwich and coffee does not offset the price benefits of flying LCC to a European hub and then onwards.

7. In flight experience. Regardless of the views of BA cabin crew. I have found them no better than their LCC counterparts. If anything LCC cabin crew are not as condesending in their treatment of passengers.

I believe there are 1000,s of people in the UK like me who have woken up to the fact that we do have a choice of carrier and more often than not BA does not feature. There goes your market.How else can you increase/maintain profit ? by reducing costs.

If you are correct BA will be bust by the end of the month. I am not holding my breath.

That's a distortion of what St Nicholas said.

The actual comment made was And I think that's very true.

As you say, BA aren't going to disappear down the plughole any time soon. But they operate in a competitive environment, and further strike action will just drive their passengers to other airlines. And they won't necessarily come back afterwards.

You know St Nicholas, as a business person who used to have a no-BA policy after an incident in the nineties involving BA that left me with a very sour taste in my mouth, I have found that thanks to what I've learned on PPRuNe, I have yet to have a bad flight with BA.

I have found the c/c and the f/o to be very friendly and appreciative when I leave the a/c and thank them for a good flight, and I will continue to fly BA where it makes sense.

Unfortunately, these days with my specific situation, the entire experience counts, from booking to getting there to check-in to the flight, not just on-a/c experience, and FR and EZY fall down on the booking and check-in front (although EZY less so than FR). This is not a reflection on the c/c or f/o of either carrier, but rather management policies that IMO cost the airlines.

To date, because of my location, I am still better off flying from LGW or LHR with BA, TAP, Iberia, SAS, KLM/AF than having to travel either to LTN or STN just to save a few quid, only to be 'abused' by already harrassed g/c because my luggage is anything but standard.

Granted, BA, FR and EZY are not responsible for security (BAA is, excepting LTN), so to lay the claims of a bad airport experience on their doorstep is unfair, but after recent experiences, I find that the airlines have done (or could do) more to make that experience less off-putting.

I still don't fly BA long-haul because I use the competition (who IMO have provided me with a consistent flying experience ever since I used them the first time), but that might just change... currently I'm not affected by the perks that Upper Class et al used to be provided with and are no longer, but who knows.

S.

I try to fly as many different airlines as possible (assuming I have a choice). Yesterday I flew BA: LHR-FRA on #902 on the 763. I enjoyed it: it was comfortable; professional; arrived early into FRA; and the food was all right. I paid around £52 for the one-way flight including taxes, which represented excellent value. Overall I'd probably rate BA 7 out of 10. I'm certainly looking forward to using Terminal 5 again.

Yes Juliet, T5 is brilliant. Such bad luck that our customers and the employees of BA, were so badly let down by management incompetence. Now it is running well and anyone not using BA like St Nick, is cutting his nose.....

and the French have a better service ethic? Now that can't be true.

PiB,

You obviously think I'm a silly little girl who doesn't remember the past nor do I think for myself.

I'll keep this short. I've said on several occasions (not just in this thread) that I'm not agreeing with reducing our t&c's. However, I understand why management are looking at cutting costs. My last sentence doesn't mean I agree or welcome changes to my t&c's.

Of course I remember the mess from the past from management, but that was not part of this discussion, and therefore I did not want to discuss it, all I said was that we need to look to the future.

I'll think my thoughts and you can think yours.

Gg

T5 is nice... except the Arrivals part that lets you down a little...

Granted, Arrivals is not a place many people hang around in, but I was a tad disappointed that the ground floor (Arrivals) didn't mirror the upper floor (Departures):

While sunny and attempts were made to brighten up the place (nice trees and nice fountains), the depth of Arrivals makes the place very narrow and prone to overcrowding (especially when you have 600 passengers streaming out of baggage and into the waiting mass of people, chauffeurs and 'party X' placard holders).

I know, I know... Costa is there to allow people to sit and wait, but they don't really do hot food, something that I would like to at least have before I make the journey home (especially when you have to sit on a bus).

Just a minor grump. I'm impressed with the way check-in and bag drop went (although I would like to recommend that BA make it clearer that people have to check in at a booth before proceeding to bag drop - the ground staff sounded very exasperated that pax 'didn't get it yet'). I'm impressed with security (although I got pulled for secondary inspection because I forgot a can of Red Bull in my bag - bad me, bad, bad).

:-)

S.

I think 'Clarkson' put if perfectly when he mentioned that 'General Motors' was a 'pensions & healthcare' company that also made cars.

BA is going down the same road.

Time are changing and benefits are not what they used to be. If we still want a 'national' carrier we have to accept change otherwise carry-on....... and put the company out of business.

Here we go again HighFlyin.....not another management clone. Have you met Gg?

Just last year it was said tha BA was a pension fund with wings. Well we got screwed on that. So much for 'militant' unions! I am now working another five years for the same pension.

I suppose I should take a pay cut as well, or maybe pay BA for allowing me to come to work? Just remember the more the airlines cut costs, the more safety is impacted. You pay peanuts you get monkeys. All the passengers on the 777 that crashed walked away with barely an injury. Luck, or was it down to the calibre of the Flight and Cabin Crews?

Yes times are changing, but not for the better.

According to the BA on line fact book, BA employs 49,957 people at a cost of £1,971M.

There are 282 aircraft.

That's nearly 180 people for every aircraft in the fleet.

Before we embark on a bonfire of the vanities, and the wholesale destruction of the (lives) of hard working crew - what the hell do the rest of these people do?

One day BA will have one A318 with 4 crew, and a staff of 60,000 to administer them.

Thanks Mick,

There was a cartoon a few years ago depicting BA managers in a rowing boat. There were ten manager/cox's and one person rowing.

When Marshall and King took over, BA was in its heyday. They employed a guy called Mike Levine, a New York Jew who had been involved with People Express. He did a big hatchet job on the management at BA. People came back to their offices on a Monday morning and found the key no longer worked the door lock. All their personal possesions were on the floor outside! And you never guess what? Aircraft still took off and landed. The loss of all these managers didn't make a blind bit of difference to the operation. So what were they all doing?

It was only after this clear out that BA made the huge profits that it as taken twenty years to reciprocate. Rod Eddington called BA management "permafrost".

Now we have managers managing Pursers, who try to justify their position by stating that they have reduced sickness. The problem now is BA is so short of cabin crew, they are having to cancel services. They have reduced the headline number of crew so that there are not enough to cover the operation at certain times of the month, due to part time contracts.

Unfortunately for our customers, it is always the front line staff that are squeezed and cut to the bone. I have often heard that we do not have enough engineers, pilots, check in staff, cabin crew, but we have never been short of managers!

To the point where every hiccup be it weather somewhere or ATC, is an IRROP and passengers and staff suffer alike.

When cut to the bone and pushed everyday to get flights out, how on earth is SMS supposed to work? Do we really think staff are going to be looking for the risk-points when they know they'll be on the carpet for delays?

:D

There is a bit of a purge going on as we speak though, it just highlights how disconnected Waterworld is from operations that no one has noticed.

There are redundancies in HR, IM(IT!), BAPIML and the dust is just settling from the last manager purge.

PiB says...

then says...

But BA only get the best...

Surely, stupidity can only recruit stupidity as its ally?

You can't have it both ways...

:ok: