BA still "Too Expensive to Run"5000 jobs to go ???

[mr Q]

BA staff fear 5,000 job cuts

by Juliette Jowit, transport editor
Sunday December 14, 2003
The Observer

Thousands of jobs are to be axed by British Airways amid growing fears about the company's finances.
The airline, which has debts of £4.8bn, is
to introduce the measures in the face of rising costs and falling income from ticket sales.

The company, which is struggling to cope with a world economic downturn and competition from low-cost airlines, will publish its plan in January, it was revealed last night.

The programme will include tough cost-cutting and thousands of job cuts. Last night a BA spokesman refused to comment on speculation that the job losses could be as high as 5,000.

However, another source said the 5,000 figure was credible. 'It [the figure] might be higher, it might be lower ... It's not an outlandish estimate,' he said.

Two years ago BA announced a drastic cost-cutting programme, including sacking 13,000 workers. Since then, revenue has dropped even further by £1.9bn.

To add to their problems, BA last month revealed a £1bn shortfall in its pension scheme, which will cost another £133m a year to put right.

And last night a senior company official admitted income has still not picked up as expected this year. 'It's looking a bit better now but I think everyone in the airline is so cautious because we have been there before,' he said.

Rod Eddington, chief executive, revealed that the early action plan would be published before the usual date in March in a letter to BA's 46,000 staff. He said that the airline was still suffering the impact of terrorism and war in Iraq, an economic downturn and competition from low-cost carriers - forcing BA to slash ticket prices to fill its planes.

Results for the first six months of the year, showing profits dropped from £310m last year to £60m, were 'disappointing', he said.

'In short our airline - despite everyone's best efforts in recent years - is still too expensive to run, particularly in these economic conditions.

[BEagle]

5000 to go?

Start with the 'Dirty Tricksters'....... For until their lingering taint is expunged once and for all, ba will never have a decent image to many.

Good luck to all the flight crews and cabin crews who work so hard to provide a quality service despite jurassic mis-management from the Waterworks.

[AIRWAY]

They fire, and then hire again... Cheap labour i guess...

:rolleyes:

[BoeingMEL]

What a load of excrement! I've been trying to get BA Gatwick/Palma tickets for January. Hardly a single seat left... £189 one-way too! Time for a re-name (BOAC maybe?) and surrender domestic and Europe before it's all lost. Have also tried many other destinations (international too)...it seems hardly a seat to be had. If they cant put bums on seats maybe they should be asked for proof! bm

[hapzim]

The woes at MY Travel are small compared to Big Airways whom were handed most of there infrastructure, slots and routes etc. They did not have to develop from a minow.:ooh:

[Uncle Silas]

That'll be farewell to us at BA Citiexpress then.

Can't say the BA experience has been uplifting, great Flight Crews, and totally inept, useless, posturing, overborne, arrogant, patronising management. I have never ever worked for a more pathetic bunch of tossers!!!!!!! :mad:

See you all on the dole queue.

[TopBunk]

hapzim

Disagree. Not underestimating the problems at BA at all, but a loss of let's say £200m to a company valued at about £2bn, is small fry compared to a loss of £900m for a company vaued at £60m.

I suspect that BA will be around longer than MYT (maybe not much longer, but longer nonetheless). Fancy a wager?

[Carnage Matey!]

You guess wrong Airway. BA haven't made anyone redundant in donkeys years because the more militant unions will go out on strike. Thats part of the problem. They need to shed thousands of jobs (and nobody will miss them in many of the admin roles), but the unions see BA as a job creation program, not a company.

BoeingMEL, Gatwick/Palma is a GB Airways route, not technically BA. I'm not sure what the rest of your post is trying to say. Everyone knows the loads are great. Its the fact that the yields are **** thats the problem.

[CapedCrewsAider]

Uncle Silas,

Couldn't agree more,

'Can't say the BA experience has been uplifting, great Flight Crews, and totally inept, useless, posturing, overborne, arrogant, patronising management. I have never ever worked for a more pathetic bunch of tossers!!!!!!!'

Sad thing is if they do get rid of the more inept they seem to turn up at GB Airways. Never seen a more clueless bunch anywhere and I have worked for some real losers in the last 25 years.

It seems that people want to fly, e.g. record passenger numbers on other carriers, for some reason they don't want, or can't or choose not, to fly BA.

Seems inconceivable that if some aircraft are full there is no price elasticity.

Maybe the reason is ipss poor marketing/sales compared to the low cost operators who have at least realised you can't sell if you keep it all a big secret. This is why GB's pricing is so out of kilter with the market.

You can bet if BA gets rid of people it will be front line staff, the management will be looking after themselves. Just more mayhem to piss the BA customers off even further.

[Human Factor]

It's got to the stage where if the unions say:

"We're not going to allow you to make 5000 redundant";

then the reply is likely to be:

"Tough! You go on strike and there'll be 50000 redundant."

May sound flippant but if they strike, we won't last long. If we lose 5000, we may survive.

[411A]

More than likely, a few more than 5000 need to hit the bricks.

Good place to start...20% pay cut for flight crews, 30% for cabin staff.

Get rid of the loafers, especially in the cabin.:ok:

[Fright Level]

Why do I go off a thread as soon as 411A sticks his nose in? Are they any of PPRUNE's discussions on which you don't have an opinion?

[woodpecker]

Having put 411A on my "ignore list" I enjoy Pprune once again without the inputs of that twit.

Would recommend it to everyone

[Fright Level]

Woody, thanks for that, I didn't even know PPRUNE had that function. Now the thread looks better already :D

[Anti-ice]

You have no idea 411A. :rolleyes:

[Tandemrotor]

Hey woodpecker, great tip!

[Spearing Britney]

For all your faults 411A I must acknowledge the fact that you do have a brain, you wouldn't be able to rile people quite so much without one.

A 20% pay cut for flight crew, well that may help but look at the flight crew to 'other' ratio for BA and I think you will find that a 1% pay cut elsewhere will have a similar effect. That, and it will leave front line passenger meeting staff with a will to live...

A 30% pay cut for cabin crew, well that means none of them can live within 2 hours of London so your standby measures must change. Your repeat custom will fall due to the enormous level of 'pissed-offness' amongst your front line team and the reflection of that on the punters.

Drink your appaling American "whiskey" and offend the other wonder beings in Sedona all you like but leave us alone would you.

[411A]

Sorry to rile 'em up so much Spearing Britney, but mainline airlines just have to cut costs, to bring 'em in line with the likes of Ryanair and Easy.
If not done, the entire company will disappear, like it or not....and many won't.

Many live in a dream world where they believe that the 'large' can't fail.
These folks are sadly mistaken.

Bite the bullet now, or watch the entire show go down the drain.
Just the way it is.:sad:

[BEagle]

Attempting to cut pay would certainly cause industrial action - and quite rightly too. But cutting back on the managers, overpaid and useless flesh-pressing suits at the Waterworks is overdue. As is firing the last of the Dirty Tricksters.

Turning to the question of cabin manning, if you run a cheap-as-chips set up like RyanAir or easyJet, with minimum levels of cabin service as a policy, then you probably don't need anything more than the legal minimum number of cabin crew.

But if you're offering a multi-class service, to feed and water all your punters on shortish sectors will be highly labour intensive. So you may need more than just the minimum.

Whilst there is a high demand for low-cost airlines, there is still a high demand for business flights with more leg room, higher quality food, higher levels of service than the LCAs need to offer. So there's bound to be some market polarisation; the trick for ba is to get its share of the top end revenue without losing economy class customers to the LCAs. How? That's down to marketing/branding/image and sales management.

But whilst the Dirty Tricksters are still around, you won't be getting my custom, Skippy.

Just the way it is:(

[ojs]

Personally, I don't think pay cuts are going to be on the cards: industrial relations are too poor to stomach them. Nor do I think there are going to be cuts in front-line staff (C-in and CC) because the firm's currently recruiting for both those areas...

No, the cuts will come from elsewhere. Remember that the pensions mountain is insurmountable as it is, so reduced staff costs (ergo reduced company pensions contributions) are a pre-cursor to dealing with that.

The figure of 5,000 won't all be actual jobs - it'll be MPE. So no overtime, and redistributing existing jobs elsewhere. So if (say) Finance needs to lose 100 MPE then 50 people moving to Marketing could do the trick.

I think the question is rather... Why did Future Size and Shape (part 1) when we were promised "This'll be the end of the job cuts" turn out not to be true? It doesn't bode well for trust.

[Mentaleena]

411A

What made your last post above so much more "normal" than your usual rylers? Seems like you can easily adapt to pressure from others.

[maxy101]

Point is 411A that a lot of the pilots are earning the same or less than Ryanair or Easy. Its the 60K quid tug drivers and 40K pursers that seem to be the problem. There is no added value there....

[Shuttleworth]

It's true that some of the cabin crew salaries are astonishing when compared with other airlines.
For example married Pursers living in 700K houses with children at public school.

Even new joiners at LHR nett ( and I mean nett not gross) £1850 per month minimum . Often they take home £2050. Now that's more than most first officer jobs in the uk.

However -some of the real problems at BA are;
(i)the "back office " overheads are still enormous.
(ii) the pension defecit
(iii) vast numbers of part time staff ( it's undisputed that two part timers are far far more expensive to employ than one full timer) Over 50% of the cabin crew are part time ( part timers astonishingly have the highest sickness levels)

BA would love to acquire an international rival in order to slash costs and put the merged entity on a stronger footing.

The imperative is to improve marketing (should be easy give n the mediocre standard of BA's current efforts) and the quality of customer service. "The business is about how to get the customer to willingly pay a premium for your brand, how to get the consumer to pay more to go with you than with someone else."

Only when BA gets this right can it hope to survive in a short-haul market driven by the budget airlines, Ryanair and easyJet.


I have every confidence in Rod . I think he and Broughton will take on some of the ridiculous working practices and BA will come through the pain to be successful again.

[Judge and Jury]

Lets face it we all know where the jobs cuts will be/need to be and that's the management at Waterside! The front line staff as always are working to the maximum, hence another 450 Cabin Crew just been taken on and most pilots working an average of 870 hours a year!

I'm sure if BA actually do this time make 5000 managers redundant it will make the difference needed. Unfortunately it seems every time they say they are going to cut the managers they re assign them to other jobs but on the SAME salary. Moving a manager to Ticket Desk on £35K, what sense does that make, especially as the real ticket desk are on a lot less sitting right next to the so called managers.

Come on Rod clear out the excess in the officers, and quick.

[Jim Kirk]

BA have lost the plot a long time ago. Any successful business they get their hands on is ruined and making a loss in an astonishingly short period of time.

Why don't they just hand over all their LGW short-haul operations to us at GB Airways so that we can make these routes profitable once again, thereby letting them save face and concentrate on their long-haul operations?

Let's face it, BA haven't been worth "tuppence" for quite a few years now.

[kinsman]

They seem at the moment to be handing short-haul at LGW to Easyjet!

[Flying_Sarah747]

Hmmm, so is this job cutting just for the managers etc? I'm worried now...I've just moved from Australia to the UK to be cabin crew for BA! I'm in trouble if I loose my job!

[slice]

Flying_sarah747 unless you have family in the UK, I cannot for the life of me imagine why you moved to the UK - or were you just not rude enough to get into QF!! :E

[Desk-pilot]

If this rumour is true then it's a very sad day for this industry. BA is not unlike many other major carriers in having struggled to adapt to the low cost carriers however life is about to get a lot tougher for the low costs.

BA has now dramatically cut its fares on all routes and is now starting to hit the low costs where it hurts. They are fast establishing themseles as an airline which delivers a superb standard of service at a price marginally above that of those who herd you onto their filthy aeroplanes and fly you to an airport nowhere near where you wanted to go. The public are realising this and that's reflected in the load factors.

Load factors are running at record levels and the airline is now back making a small profit in sharp contrast to other flag carriers. The share price is up 25% in a month on the back of this.

The 13000 headcount reduction was mainly taken from the back office. There is a lot less dead wood than there once was, although still too much bureaucracy. If a further 5000 do go lets hope this can be achieved on a voluntary basis.

It's about time pilots realised that many of those who they like to portray as useless bureaocrats in Waterside are making a significant contribution to turning the airline around in marketing, IT, Sales, Revenue Management, eBA and the like. I should know, I'm married to one of them.

Things aren't perfect at BA, many love to predict its demise, but I'll lay money on it still being around long after any of us.

Never underestimate BA's power to innovate and respond.

Desk-pilot

[maxy101]

A friend of mine is part-time cabin crew at LHR. She did 8 sectors last year and earned 9K. (She is 33%) Thats a better hourly rate than Rod....

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Never underestimate BA's power to innovate and respond.

I choked on my tea then!

WWW

[Shuttleworth]

Flying Sarah -It would be a pity if forums such as this and publications such as the Daily Mail made you fear for your new job. BA are short of cabin crew. many are retiring and leaving for other reasons. You have joined the productive end of the business ( I assume you are full time!).. and I'm sure you will be free from redundancy.
Welcome ! Enjoy!
PS - as others have asked - what on earth made you leave sunny wonderful Aus to work in the Uk???

[411A]

Seems a few here are indeed aware of the rather high cost of the (mostly) ineffective/incompetent cabin crew.
A good start would be to get rid of the lot, and start over with new hires, on much lower salaries.
May be difficult (contracts, unions) but could be done by taking the company into the UK equalivant of the US chapter eleven bankruptcy, abrogate all union contracts (with the courts approval), and start afresh.
Pilots would be given the choice of a pay cut or dismissal, with cabin staff totally replaced, unless they were willing to accept massive salary reductions.
A total house cleaning of support staff as well would be needed, especially at headquarters.
Middle managers would fast disappear, along with the staff needed to keep them in place.
BA could become a premier example of an efficiently run, profitable aircarrier, with staff rewarded with large profitsharing payments following successful business quarters.
In the end, there is every likelyhood of vastly increased renumeration for those that remain.

Will this happen? Will the deadwood that has plagued BA for so many years be removed?

Don't hold your breath.

[Desk-pilot]

www,

Your post certainly made me smile ;-) but look at the evidence:

World first transatlantic jet service
Worlds first supersonic passenger service
Worlds first fully flat bed in First Class
Worlds first fully flat bed in business class
One of the first airlines to offer e-ticket, the first to offer it on international routes
First airline to put 100% of its staff through a putting people first programme and revolutionise its service delivery
First airline to employ a specialist wine buyer and leading international chefs to gain competitive advantage with superior food and wines bought at lower prices
First airline to offer four class service on international longhaul routes so offering an enhanced economy option
Worlds first personal video library on board in First Class
World's first well being in the air programme
World's first on board internet and email service
World leading flight and cabin crew training facilities used to train over 100 other airlines worldwide
First airline in the world to automate back office processes using e-forms and other e-working initiatives
BA's Waterside HQ was one of the first buildings in the world to provide a wireless infrastructure, so enabling workplace mobility
State of the art world cargo facility opened at LHR
BA has also recently won the best airline travel award for the 16th year in succession along with 6 other awards including best First Class and Best Business Class.

For all its faults, BA has demonstrated time and again its ability to surprise the industry. Personally I hated most of the ethnic tailfins, but look out of your window at the liveries of many of the world's airlines and you'll see the influence BA has had and how many have followed their lead. BA is a company which continually reinvents itself because at the heart of it all it has a tremendously gifted, loyal, talented and passionate workforce who believe in it and wouldn't want to work for anyone else no matter how much money was on the table.

Desk-pilot

[windowseat]

Have to agree with Desk-Pilot. As an ex-nationalised airline it's innovation record is impressive. Especially compared with most of Europe's other flag carriers whose product and service levels are pretty uninspiring. For example what passenger was excited by the merger of Air France & Alitalia. Compare that to Virgin & SIA. Flat bed business class is a real plus. Also the cabin service (including the franchisees), whether flying up front or at the back is always friendly and professional.

Having said that, dealing with BA on a business level you feel you are still talking to an overstaffed government entity.

[HOVIS]

Er.. Carnage Matey.

There are several hundred ex BA engineers who were forced out of the company last year, BHX, MAN & BFS to name a few examples.

Technically, yes they were voluntary redundancies, however when faced with a letter TELLING one to take the severance or be sacked it does pong a bit.

Oh, and the trade unions did bu**er all to back up the staff, that is why many have torn up their Amicus membership cards!:mad:

[RRAAMJET]

411A, I understand where you are coming from with the paycuts amongst staff in AA and others in the US this year helping to lower cents/sm's and avoid CH11 (even though Dastardly Don and Malicious Mullin had other plans for exec compensation), but you are off the mark addressing BA's Flight Deck crew this way. Have you any idea of the cost of living around Heathrow, or HKG (Cathay being another of your favourite targets)? I'll clue you in, having been based at both in previous lives:

far more than even Scottsdale!!!

I know you flew in Asia, but living there now is far more expensive than when you were there, as it is within 2 hours of London. I have a 900 sq.ft apartment in London on the river which I bought new 20 years ago for 100 grand sterling - it's now worth 600k. A new hire singlie for BA just could not afford to live near LHR.

My point is the survival of the high professional standards you so frequently espouse as having youself depends on attracting the best candidates in the future; there is strong evidence that this is already being eroded amongst US college grads. Aviation, with it's future of low pay, no pensions, and a track record of inept and dishonest management, no longer "cuts the mustard". Stock-sharing holds no attractions either after Enron and UAL. Where have you been?

The situation is similar in JFK; I used to share a crash pad with Jet Blue, etc, 'cos they couldn't afford anywhere in NY. They get a disbursement of JBLU stock, which has lost a bunch in recent weeks, must to the worriment of my friends.

Oh, BTW, the average BA 747-400 Snr FO earns less than a 717 FO for AirTran - a supposed LCC.

Frequently there are crumbs of reasonable thought in your posts disguised as sniper shots, but in this case I believe you waded into a sinkhole at full speed...

I just can't imagine insulting the entire group of BA cabin crew like you did. I know several excellent BA cabin crew...at least get to know some of them personally before opening fire. Where I went to school in the UK, I would have been given a "f" grade in etiquette class for some of your posts, and shunned at happy-hour as a loud-mouthed "know-all". Surely that's not the way you intend to come across, is it? I'll continue to give you the benefit of the doubt....:hmm: :suspect:

[Final 3 Greens]

411A
May be difficult (contracts, unions) but could be done by taking the company into the UK equalivant of the US chapter eleven bankruptcy, abrogate all union contracts (with the courts approval), and start afresh.

There is no equivalent of Chapter 11 in the UK.

You are, like one of your fellow countrymen, assuming that 'American Values' are universal, when in fact they are anything but.

By the way, BA is doing rather better than some airlines are alleged to be faring.

As for the 'ineffective' cabin crew, I must have been lucky to avoid those on the 197 sectors I have flown with BA over the past 20 years, where BA cc have set the standards that some other north atlantic carriers have dismally failed to meet, with the honourable exception of Virgin.

[orange_bubble]

Stansted = new runway (it was always going to happen)
low cost = future of commerical aviation in europe, most profit, most expansion.

BA have laid out the red carpet for easyJet by selling off GO.

[M.Mouse]

Putting aside the anti - BA rhetoric, the jealousy and the plainly ignorant postings it is true there are many things wrong with BA.

Rod Eddington is well aware of the problems we face not least the reluctance of the workforce to see what we are truly facing.

BA as a company is as much a victim of its past as the current economic and competitive climate. By that I mean the overmanning, the restrictive practises, the demarcation, the top heavy workforce, etc.

Like many long established and previously nationalised industries there is a lack of belief that we are subject to a very different world from 10, 20 or 30 years ago. Those days are gone forever and unless collectively the workforce, and by that I mean unions realise it, and lead their members responsibly in facing the inevitable major changes, we have little hope of surviving long term.

Ditching the mindset that one's own department is very efficient and ALL the problems are in other departments would be a good start.

The examples of some of BA's innovations, stated by desk-pilot, illustrate how, when we are good, we are up amongst the best. There are vast numbers of people in BA who are hard working and decent.

For all our sakes I hope that minds are open when presented with the plans in January, it won't be pretty but I believe we really are at the make or break point for the company.

[In trim]

I agree with WWW

BA may have been innovative in the past, but not now. Even if they are innovative in areas of product, they simply will never have the balls to really confront some of the core issues.

Look at their ground handling costs and staffing levels. Look at some of the union agreements in place. How many hours "work" does a typical BA Despatcher in LGW work compared with those of a 3rd party handling agent? How many of those Despatchers are on out-dated contracts at ridiculously high salaries? These costs are astronomical for a short-haul operation.

Look at the overhead costs for basics such as yield control. How many staff does the European short-haul network take to yield manage due to the complexities of the fare structures and lack of automation. Compare that with the lo-cos. Look at the lack of attention to detail in the way some of the european routes are yield managed. It simply demonstrates that BA do not have the attention to detail, or intricate knowledge of the specific markets, that the franchises used to have, nor that the lo-cos have today.

5000 staff may go, with a reduction in services no doubt also involved. Entrenchment back to LHR with further withdrawal out of LGW? More slots available for the lo-cos to make further inroads?

BA need to confront the core issues if they want to save the company. Have they got the guts to do it?

[M.Mouse]

There is no equivalent of Chapter 11 in the UK.

Er......yes there is!

Administration (http://www.companyrescue.co.uk/company_rescue/options/administration.html)

[HZ123]

Agreed with M mouse who has a good handle on many BA problems as do many others. However, as you state many issues have gone on for the last 5, 10 and 20 years. A bit like the the government each business plan has done little to address the costly problems at Flight Crew or ramp worker level. Successive groups of management have ignored the problems and by default have encouraged 'custom and practise'.

One of the main issues now is how to cut costs and achieve them. I feel that there will be considerable problems reducing staffing costs at LHR / LGW. More likely the regions will be required to make large cuts with the likelyhood of MAN, GLA or EDI and others being all outsourced and treated as GHA stations.
Possibly BA World Cargo is also at risk as there are several players waiting to take this on.

Another issue is outsourcing of LHR / LGW ramp handling but I fail to see any company larger enough or foolish enough to tender for what amounts to the problems encountered at 'Railtrack' in operating such a large operation in cramped conditions.

Outsourcing has ocurred in Europe with little or no direct BA representation at many destinations already planned, but once again this has been how things have been done by others in Euroland for a long time.

411 Some of your sugestions are a bit strong in many ways you make relevant points but I fear in addition to casting out the baby and the water, you wish to break the bath as well. My conclusion is that there far less monies to be made in this business than people think present company accepted.

[411A]

RRAAMJET,

Several of the posts after my last above set out what is wrong with BA...from a few who indeed work there.
High cost of living near LHR does not just affect pilots, ground staff have exactly the same problem, and have to report for duty there far more than flight deck crew, especially the long haul guys.

In a way, BA is a victim of past glories (Imperial Airways, BOAC, BEA) and unfortunately have become very topheavy in the middle management department.
Somethings gotta give, and a good place to start would be salary reductions, shared equally in all departments...especially TOP management.
For them...it goes triple, at least.
The realities of business dictate cost reduction measures.
If BA disappears, imagine how happy the folks at BM would be...not to mention VS.:ooh:

[RRAAMJET]

Absolutely correct, 411A, but as I have never been a Ramp worker or Cabin Crew for BA, or an accountant for them, I don't pretend to lecture on the solution or espouse firing the lot of them.... :rolleyes:

It's called politeness.

[mjenkinsblackdog]

When is Ba going to sharpen up its management.
Cut it down and make them take a pay cut.
Ba is an inverted pyramid with far too many pen pushers.
Slice at the top would save a fortune!:cool:

Cut out the cocktail party broad room hangers on!

[Final 3 Greens]

M Mouse
Er......yes there is!
No there is't. Administration does not offer the same provisions as chapter 11.

Ask any US company who have been attacked by 'competitors' using chapter 11 to reduce their overheads and they will tell you in language rather more forceful than I use here. In fact, some US commentators regard chapter 11 as verging on the anti competitive.

[sevenforeseven]

Working for the 2nd british longhaul carrier out LHR, I must say BA as a airline is envied by most but cannot see anyone wanting to get into the pickle that they have got themselves into due to poor management.
VS probably pay cabin crew 50% of what BA do, but come to recruitment time the hopefuls queue runs around the block, as I am sure it does for BA too.
Cabin crew serve for an average of 4 years with VS and infinity for bA, which in my opinion is just where VS wants it. You get fresh young faces all the time eager to please the passenger. With BA you get a cabin crew member who has been there since time began and have set in there ways unable to leave because where else would you get so much for so little "nowhere".
In the old days if you wanted to be cabin crew you got your salary no matter you destination. So how is it that BA pay suppliments for travelling to, for example Delhi, these are on top of your allowance. If you want to be crew you have to take the rough with the smooth.
Sorry for crew bashing but its just a example of how the company has got it so wrong, a fair rate of pay for a fair job.
Engineers/pilots who hold the passengers lives in there hands deserve far more money than what they get. Both these jobs are proffesional, so why do BA pay less to new recruits in this field.
Never mind when it all finally winds up which it will if not corrected, then someone will say "if only we had the balls to take on the CC unions" but then it will be too late.

[PeePeerune]

Working for B.A I feel that a reduction in certain salarys,incl management,flight/cabin crew, is a must.They earn very good coin and they seem to be the only areas at present that havent been reduced as much as other departments.why cant htey take a packed lunch to work for starters,htat would save some pennies,the eat better in the flight deck on flight than the punters sitting in the cabin!!!!!!!!!!.,and as for the chap who posted previous about flying his 197 sectors in 20 years!!!,wake up mate your costing the airline thousands,and get a real job.

[Mini mums]

PeePeerune,

You're obviously not a professional pilot, so what are you doing on this forum? It's for pilots to share opinions, and information. It's not for people like you to tell us we shouldn't be fed at work, and we earn too much. We'll ground the flight and take an hour for lunch in mid-atlantic shall we? Your sort of post is little short of pathetic.

:errr..incorrect, the site is for professional pilots as well as the dozens of other professional groupings associated with aviaition. Pax and those with a interest in aviation also welcome to post.

We're at the sharp end, actually earning revenue for the airline. Please enlighten me as to how you add to the bottom line?

We have responsibility for peoples lives, as do the engineers, and cabin crew, not piles of paper.

BA really does need to get it's ideas straight, and most pilots are wedded to BA, not like you're average IT/management type who does the same job whether at BA, BT, BP, BBC, BAT . . .

I'll do everything I can to turn this airline round, and I only wish all my colleagues felt the same way.

I hope the day will soon come when all staff adopt an attitude along the line of "ask not what BA can do for you, but what you can do to make this a successful airline again"

Right, I'm off to make my packed lunch for tomorrow . . .
:rolleyes

[Brit312]

As usual when the subject of BA comes up there are always people with clever and instant answer to what must be a very complicated problem, but "mimi mums" yours must be the most pompous reply I have ever seen, and it is attitudes like that which get aircrew a bad name. People always think that the problem lies with some other group and never with them.

All this rubbish about responsibility for other people's lives. I would accept this, but I think you have forgotten that you are on the same aircraft and so if you protect yourself then you protect the passengers, it is that simply.

As for your comments on paper pushers, well how do you think the aircraft [your responsibility ] get to the gate in a safe and legal manner. It sure has nothing to do with pilots but with engineers and an awful lot of vital paper pushers in stores , production, and planning depts,aswell as many more

How do your passengers { for whom you are soley responsible} get to the aircraft. Again nothing to do with pilots,but again due to a lot of paper pushers in the various sales and pax handling departments.

Remember an airline relies on all departments delivering their product on time and within budget, and aircrew should remember that they are just the visible tip of a very big pyramid, and that they earn no revenue on their own

Regards Brit 312 { 38 years with BOAC /British Airways }

[52049er]

the eat better in the flight deck on flight than the punters sitting in the cabin

haha haha haha haha

as for the chap who posted previous about flying his 197 sectors in 20 years

...I think you'll find he's a customer. They're quite important and at the sharp end we try to be nice to them as they pay our wages. Thanks for your input.

[M.Mouse]

why cant htey take a packed lunch to work for starters,htat would save some pennies,the eat better in the flight deck on flight than the punters sitting in the cabin!!!!!!!!!!.,

PeePeerune

I will leave the rest of your risible posting to others to argue with but if you really believe the quotation above you do not have a clue what you are talking about.

It may seem small in the scheme of things but 90% of crew food is comparable with pig swill.

Frankly I would prefer the pilots flying ME safely from A to B to be the best fed people on the aircraft but that would cost money.

I avoid crew food wherever possible but unfortunately, sometimes being airborne for 12+ hours, that is not always possible.

[bunnygirl]

Cabin crew at BA have been pruned down as far as they can be, without going self service. That also goes for our flight crew colleagues, I can only speak for LGW EF, but our flight crew are doing many many 4 sector days, more than they ever have in the past.

The problem really does lie, with the office based staff...many of whom do a sterling job, but there is also many we could do without. For example we have a product department at LGW, which is responsible for implementing new service procedures, trailling new products etc etc...and a much needed and required department. But we also have a similar department around the M25 at LHR....WHY....we are the same company, offering the same service from both LGW and LHR....but we have TWO product departments.

That is just one of many examples that i could give...BA I feel is now waking up to the fact that our colleagues with the LCC's do a great job, with much less people!

[normal_nigel]

FACT from a management briefing last week there's still 400 ground managers on gardening leave on full pay from last time.

We've got big problems and the sooner the TGWU and BASSA realise this the better.The company aren't bluffing this time.

NN

[reynoldsno1]

Right, I'm off to make my packed lunch for tomorrow . . .
Aaaaaah, contracting out the catering services already, good start .......:}

[loaded1]

411a I never cease to marvel at your posts. You just dont know what you are talking about.

If you implement a 20% pilot pay cut at BA, guess what will happen?

The airline will stop. It will stop because the new blood in the pilot workforce will go to the low cost airlines who pay.......more, or it will leave to other EU carriers who do pay the going rate. Not, of course, that salaries on our side of the pond have ever got anywhere near the levels of the majors in the USA, where I presume you earn your corn. Must be fun lecturing us about high pay though: bit like talking with your mouth full, however.

Further to that, we here in the UK (where I take it that you dont live) are enjoying something approaching full employment and a property boom, particularly in West London where, you may recall, our airport is.

If you were to see your dream come true, I also predict that many older pilots will retire early or do something else. (Where are the legions of experienced and trained replacements who will be acceptable to BA's insurers?). There are, quite simply, other things to do to make a living that dont involve being endlessly blamed for the failings of others.

Frontline staff throughout BA have got to the stage where we are all tired of seeing a magnificent airline employing thousands of dedicated people in EVERY area of the business dragged down by the debts run up by Bob Ay@ling, who, with his management team, (many of whom are still in place), bought the wrong aircraft at the wrong time configured for the wrong market and painted them in a woeful, customer-alienating tail job.

£4.8 BILLION of debt is BA's primary problem, not the endless staff issues you cite. We will cure them, but in doing so one has to realise that there are alternative avenues of employment for many of BA's staff than endlessly listening to a management make ever more excuses for its own errors of strategy and timing whist being unable to resolve basic issues surrounding the delivery of a workable full-service product.

If you charge in like a bull in a china shop as you suggest, BA wont exist any more Great, I here you say, but the lo costers dont want to run an integrated international network. That is not their business model, so they wont replace us. And if we fail London's commercial life, NATS, the CAA and BAA are finished too.

Somehow, I just dont think that this will happen. AS others in this thread have observed, we are fighting back with market leading innovation and a sense of what we can be. Ploys like yours guarantee failure. Perhaps thats your real motive. How is your start-up airline coming along?

[411A]

Very well, thanks loaded1, for your concern.

Replacement for BA...already in the wings, BM and VS will take up the slack, make no mistake.

Sir Richard must be laughing up his sleeve, Sir Michael as well:E

[AndyPandy]

Cabin crew at BA have been pruned down as far as they can be, without going self service

Shouldn't that read that if we reduce cabin crew any further they won't be able to go and rest in the bunks less than two and a half hours into a flight?

[Left2primary]

Andy Pandy,

that might be two and a half hours after take off on a fourteen hour tour of duty with an evening departure.

Given the cummulative effects of jet lag and sleep deprivation Long haul cabin crew get rest when they can. Not necessarily when they want, or need it.

Had it ever occured to you that they might "just" be human beings?

I thought not. :ok:

[Flying_Sarah747]

Thanks for the replies everyone. At least I don't have to worry about my cabin crew job now. :)

Well, I left Australia for the UK cause all I wanna do is fly, and I should have started training with QF almost a year ago now, but have been on hold for a year with the downturn in the industry etc. Besides, a change is good, and I love London!! :) (Not looking forward to leaving my 30 degree weather for your 6 degree weather though!)

[Mactom]

Desk-pilot,

Agree with much of your post but some of your comments about low cost carriers are way off the mark. Are you referring to Ryanair? Sounds like it to me. I work for Easy and I fly brand new aircraft to major airports. I don't think the public have the perception that they are herded on to filthy aircraft when they walk down the airbridge to a brand new 737 or Airbus. Is this the perception of the low cost carriers that the marketing people in BA have? Surely not......

The travelling public are not stupid and they tend these days to vote with their wallet (I'm talking about Europe only here). BA have fought back with lower fares but there is no point in low fares if the yield doesn't pay the bills. I travel on BA as a customer fairly regularly and it is good - nice aircraft & crew and good service. The problem is not the product - it's the cost to BA of providing it. The Chief Exec has got probably one of the most difficult jobs in the industry - restructuring a huge company while keeping the Heathrow unions happy. I am sure he knows exactly what needs to be done but will he get away with it and if so at what cost to the company? A great airline at the end of the day though.

[loaded1]

Well 411a, if BMI and Virgin can replace us the very best of luck to them. I think you'll find that there is a difference in scale that they would find hard to bridge. I also believe that as the shortage of route- experienced, type-rated pilots grows, (as widely predicted when the trend rate of growth of air travel is looked at), they will face cost pressures to pay something nearer to the European Airline average rate for the job.

I notice that you make no comment about the vast difference between salaries in your part of the world and over here in Europe, yet still see fit to lecture us Europeans about "pay cuts". Perhaps you volunteered 25% of your inflated American salary to your employer to prop your erstwhile company up in the good years?

Thought not.

Meanwhile, I am delighted to hear your positive report about the airline that you intend to create.

What real world evidence is there of this start-up carrier? Do you hold any route licenses, own any aeroplanes, have an operating base, own any slots, have a corporate identity, employ anyone, have an office, a web site, a phone number?

I think we should be told. BA will be there long after your dreams are dust.

[sevenforeseven]

411a......andypandy

SPOT ON !!!!!
Having paid for a world traveller plus seat back to lhr from jfk, cabin attendants served a meal (breakfast) about an hour into flt, never saw them again until 1.5 hrs before landing all weary eyed fresh out of the bunks.
On the other hand Virgin Atlantic crew were there at all times should I have needed anything, and thats like for like (economy premuim)
Virgin will and deserve to rule the roost, if service is what matters.

[411A]

If you do a search, loaded1, you will find the answer.
But, it will take effort on your part:suspect:

Meanwhile, suspect that the employment line will go 'round the block for pilots/CC at VS if long haul routes are abandoned by BA.
Likewise for BMI.
Shorthaul not a factor, others will clean BA's plate...promptly.
Don't make the mistake to think that the 'void' will not be filled.
The guys at EAL thought the same...and many are very bitter as a result.


The future of airlines will be for those that can adapt and innovate...not BA's strong points.
Still, they might survive, IF they can cast off sufficient excess baggage.

[Right Way Up]

411a,
I very much doubt that VS would look at expanding that quick. Historically VS have cherry-picked their routes i.e they only start up high yield routes. They still are not running at pre 9/11 levels.

[ojs]

sevenforeseven, while I partly agree with your posting, just as one swallow doesn't make a summer, one "poor" trip with BA compared to one excellent trip with VS doesn't indicate that VS will succeed where BA have failed. I'm sure I could find posters on here who've had poor VS experiences and excellent BA ones!

Pax do sometimes have strange perceptions that are sometimes far from reality. I would propose that for most people (esp those outside of this website / industry)...

They think Ryainair and Easyjet will probably have older aircraft than (say) BA, but where are the 737-800's in the BA fleet?

They think the passenger experience at LGW for VS is excellent, but the same handling agents will also do charter flight check-in - which doesn't receive the same praise. It's the same staff!..

They blame the airlines for having no replacement aircraft when one goes tech but never make the association with their 99p ticket!

(I'm sure there are more...)

ANY of the staff from the unionised groups - representing Cabin-Crew / Flight-Crew / IT staff / Engineering / Check-in - could stop the airline from functioning, and they are ALL, in their own way, vital to the airline. It seems to me that no matter what area staff work in, the problems within the airline are always someone else's fault: usually under the generic name "management". Has anyone at BA ever said, "Yes. I think we made a mistake there"? Not (as far as I can remember) in the last 8 years!

To my mind, a bit of appreciation - when it's deserved - for the work other areas do would go a long way to mend bridges in the airline.

[Final 3 Greens]

52049er

Yes I am a customer ;)

In fact, I am a satisfied customer.

Many people knock BA, but as a FQTV, I experience the most consistent level of service from you and still believe that you set the standards for other, especially across the North Atlantic.

Having done a couple of consulting assignments within BA, I'm well aware of some of the issues, but wish you all a successful future.

It amazes me that more Brits don't realise just what good ambassadors you are for UK plc.

[AndyPandy]

that might be two and a half hours after take off on a fourteen hour tour of duty with an evening departure

Actually it is on my fortnightly trip to the US east coast, but nice try.

[Left2primary]

Pandy Andy,

Oh well, that is different then.

You seem to have some serious issues with cabin crew rotating through rest breaks after the first meal service has been completed and brother, "Im feelin your pain".

May I suggest that next time you fly you ask for the onboard manager and explain to him/her your issues.

Given that you are a valued airline customer with much in the way of "air travel" experience, Im sure that your views on crew rest breaks would be appreciated.

Why not advise the manager when it would suit you to have the crew take some time off.

While you are at it ask to speak with the Captain too.
You'll be horrified to hear that tech crew with a 3 or 4 pilot operation start rest break rotation at top of climb and finish minutes befor top of decent!!!


:ok:

[sevenforeseven]

left2primary

I do not think andypandy could do that because the manager (csd) is usually the first to go to the bunks and last out. You will only see him/her when it comes to giving out the landing cards.
Between that zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzz zzzzzzzz zzzz

[AndyPandy]

Left2Primary

Thank you for your reply.

Your arrogant and sarcastic tone illustrates rather nicely the problem with so many BA cabin crew, if you are not BA cabin crew you do a passable impression.

When you are good you are very good but from my observations if the attitude I often (not always) experience is prevalent throughout your company you will not survive nor do you deserve too.

It is frequently the case that cabin crew rush through their duties in order to maximise their breaks. I have been travelling for many years and do talk to crew and do know what I am talking about.

[TopBunk]

Left2Primary

While you are at it ask to speak with the Captain too. You'll be horrified to hear that tech crew with a 3 or 4 pilot operation start rest break rotation at top of climb and finish minutes befor top of decent!!!


Just as any right thinking person would expect. The aircraft are certificated as 2 crew beasts, once it is clear that the departure has been completed and you are above any high ground, the crew complement over and above the 2 required start their break. The period between then and about 75-90 minutes before landing is shared out as rest.

By doing this, the flight crew are as alert as feasible when the landing has to be made in whatever weather pertains.

Personally, as a passenger, I would be much more concerned at the cabin crew being at half strength on a 6 hour night Altantic crossing, just so that they can get 45-60minutes bunk time at the expense of proper vigilance in the cabin.

[Left2primary]

Pandy Andy,

Thanks for your reply.

With all due respect you clearly do not know what you are talking about.

Cabin crew rushing the service to maximise their rest breaks?, please.

When have you ever had a plate/tray/drink removed before you have finished with it?

As airlines strive to survive in the mess created post 9/11 many [most?] mainline carriers have reduced the number of cabin crew on board .

The market reseach carried out by the company I work for indicates that passengers don't want to sit with a tray in front of them for 2 hours which is about as long as it takes for 7 of our crew to serve dinner to 315 economy passengers.

Crew make an effort to work quickly and efficiently because a 2.5/3 hour meal service benefit no one. Except perhaps yourself.

Between services only half the crew are able to be off at any one time. If you are not being looked after to the standard you expect by the other half, well that is another issue entirely and nothing to do with rest breaks.

As I mentioned before. Long haul crew suffer from sleep deprivation and jet lag. The effects of which are cummulative. They dont have the luxury of choosing when or where to sleep so do so when they can.

If my previous post appeared arrogant I'm sorry.
My tolerance for illinformed and unbalanced comments from industry wannabee's/groupies is perhaps not what it should be.

Now,I WOULD be arrogant if I was to make illinformed comments about the work arrangements as SPECIFIC TO YOUR LINE OF WORK.

Like I said before. You dont know what you are talking about because you are on the outside looking in.

P.S. It would make your hair curl to know what happens in those bunks.

:ok:

Topbunk,

so what you are saying is that there is no requirement for the cabin crew to be alert on decent and landing?

The safety department and pilots where I work would have some serious issues with that.

More illinformed nonsense from industry wannabees and groupies.

Left 2...the "industry wannabees" as you call them are as welcome to post on this thread as those employed in the industry. Hawk

[PAXboy]

loaded 1... if BMI and Virgin can replace us the very best of luck to them. I think you'll find that there is a difference in scale that they would find hard to bridge. Worst case: BA goes bankrupt. The difference in scale would be made up across the rest of the industry.

There is still a lot of spare capacity and the short haul would go to the LCCs and the other European full service carriers. Just try to imagine how long it would take LH and the rest to jump into the gap? Brit Midland and FlyBe will grab all that they can. This traffic will go to others never to return to any relaunched BA.

The long haul would be met in a variety of ways. At the beginning, VS and BD would take what they could. LH, KL, AF, SK etc. would all offer special discounts to route through their hubs. American and United would jump in wherever the desperate British govt will allow.

The govt of the day will be in one heck of a tizzy and pour govt money and time into trying to help anyone who looks vaguley like they could take up the BA mantle.

Then someone will want to relaunch a UK based carrier, picking up second hand machines and crew who are unemployed (some for the first time in their life). They will choose a name that they think will bring confidence and will want to use 'BOAC'. Think PanAm and Swiss and Brussels SN, to confirm that people think that using old names is a good idea.

In the meantime, BD and VS will have changed tactics. Currently, they do not compete against each other as they have a common competitor. Either they will team up together properly - or be at each other's throats. Either way, more services will be oferred to the public.

After a couple of years, it will settle down and the readjustment will have occurred. Many folks will have lost their jobs and others will be doing the same job for less money, some will be in the airline industry for the first time. The waters will close over the old BA and it will have gone.

That is not what I want to see, I continue to say that BA is a fine airline on which to be a passenger (as my PPRuNe name states) but providing a good passenger experience is not enough and what I have described could easily happen.

No one likes change and I have been through redundancy and unemployment and the rest but change there has to be. The airline world knows that another major European carrier has to go. The AF/KL merger will not bring about the reduction is capacity and costs that it should and so they are a high contender for the next failure but that is by no means sure.

[maxy101]

So PAXBOY Would that be a good or a bad thing for currently serving BA pilots?

[blackbox]

Wow!! (What a thread!!)

Whilst I don’t agree with what the Pilots & Cabin crew take home every month, you cant blame them, (if you won the lottery - would you turn it down?)! The company has got it self in this mess by agreeing too these terms.

A 2% pay cut across the board, along with an increase in pension contributions, if it would save my job is a good idea - but it doesn’t address the problem! There are too many level's of management!! This problem was recently addressed in the UK post office, where they sacked 3,000 managers...

The letter, which was recently sent to BA staff - was a warning! Many people in BA, have not been in the situation whereby the airline has gone bust (I have) and this shows now that difficult times are ahead..

[411A]

One wonders if BA desirves to survive, considering the latest from the EC regarding travel agent commissions, et al.

$8.4million fine, was the report. More 'dirty tricks'.

The upper managemant needs to be expunged, forthwith.

Would think Sir Richard is tipping the champange back about now.

When will the end come?:uhoh:

[Skylion]

411A,- The European Court decision on BAs incentive payments is extraordinary. Incentives have been paid to travel agents by most airlines both in their home countries and abroad since the 1980s . It is difficult to see how they can be considered as " dirty tricks". BA is less dominant in its highly competitive market ( UK) than Air France, Lufthansa and KLM in theirs and to ask or expect BA to fight with its arms tied behind its back while UK and overseas operators alike are unrestricted in the incentives they can offer in the UK puts it at a severe disadvantage.
There has never been any proven evidence of a " dirty tricks " campaign in BA and I have never met any of its staff at any level who were aware of it or any instructions to do anything unethical. BA was always a strong competitor on product, range of destinations, frequency and , where necessary, pricing ,but thats business. As a privatised company it has had to contend with government subsidised or otherwise supported carriers around the world. One would hope that it has been aggresively competitive,- it has to be,- but thats not abuse of position.

[Bellerophon]

411A

More illiterate drivel from the colonies!
It’s management not managemant

It’s deserves not desirves

It’s champagne not champange
Aspiring airline executives should at least be able to spell their own job titles correctly.

Personal abuse Bellerophon..and to save you volunteering english lessons to the colonies..banned from this forum for your irrelevant contribution.
Hawk:cool:

[Carnage Matey!]

Left2primary

With all due respect you clearly do not know what you are talking about.

Cabin crew rushing the service to maximise their rest breaks?, please.

When have you ever had a plate/tray/drink removed before you have finished with it?

Well how about the common tactic of combining two service rounds (meals/bar then tea&coffee) into one to reduce service time in direct contravention of the service standard guidelines? The whole cabin can then be done in two sweeps instead of three, allowing extra time to disappear off to the bunks on shorter sectors which do not have bunk rest scheduled. Or even better, getting some kip in the closed off First cabin with over half the crew asleep instead of performing the required cabin patrols? Frankly on some BA flights I've done you'd have more chance of finding a crew member on the Marie Celeste. The CAA didn't give them a b******ing for the fun of it.

mainline carriers have reduced the number of cabin crew on board .

BA operated with 16 cabin crew on a 747 when there were almost 400 passengers. A 17th was added when the First service was changed to a more labour intensive task in the galley. When First was changed back the 17th person stayed on board. After 911 the number was dropped to 16, but the aircraft only have around 320 passengers now. Why should it be a struggle?

[411A]

Bellerophon,

Miss your Concorde do you?
Now that they have been parked (should have been turned into beer cans), does tending the garden and concentrating on spelling fill your daily schedule?

BA is DOOMED if it cannot, as an operating company, pull up its socks and fly right.
20% pay cut for all staff, and a total goodby to an unneeded 20% would be a good start.

Vultures are closing in now.:ooh:

Oh yes, forgot to mention, on the B747, twelve CC should be enough. What are the rest for...one wonders:oh:

[412A]

...after all these years of listening to the mean-spirited rantings of 411A, I thought it time to offer a counterweight. If for no other reason than to try and balance the opinion of us 'yanks' in the minds of the majority of PPRUNE members. I am astounded that a 'Fountain Hills' based 'Walter Mitty' such as 411 feels he is an 'authority' on.....well, just about EVERY subject to do with aviation....! On behalf of all of the other aviators in the US, I apologise to those hard-working airline employees who 411 feels have marginal value and who's families should all be on food-stamps.

411A, your heartless and vitriolic comments (...always couched in your 'realist' tones...) are nothing more than the result of a bitter and twisted individual who has failed in achieving his professional desires, and resents those that have achieved their goals after many years of struggle at great cost in money and effort. I admire the European airlines like BA that have innovated throughout their history, and am distressed that the economics of the industry have been undermined by the ruthless and short-sighted individuals who have now seemingly brought their own airlines to ruin in this country (AA/UA), solely to line their own management pockets. 411A, the individual airline pilot/FA/Dispatcher, etc are NOT the problem as you seem to insist. For a B744 Captain to earn $250K a year is not unreasonable considering the number of pax carried, the years training, the responsibility and the risk to career that is carried through annual medicals, sim checks etc. These individuals spend many nights away from their families, miss many important events in their childrens lives, and suffer health and stress implications that very few careers do.

You occasionally make a worthwhile comment that is thought-provoking, but then unfailingly go on to ruin your arguement by suggesting that 'pay-cuts' (...oh, lets' start at 20%....!) and fatiguing schedules will 'bring the pilots down to reality'....

If pay-cuts are good..then heck, let's start with 50%.... No, experience has a value, and just because we are suffering through an era of the 'beancounter', doesn't mean that the piloting profession is worth no more than a common bus-driver.

I think the main reason PPRUNE keeps you around is because of the entertainment value, rather like the senile uncle at family reunions ranting on about injustices past. I suggest you get on with 'starting' your airline, where I am sure you will be regarded as the employer of choice.....:D

Also....if for no other reason, would you lighten up so that the rest of the world doesn't think that Phoenix/Scottsdale is full of sad, pathetic individuals instead of the fantastic, friendly place that it really is.....:ok:

[411A]

Gosh 412A, you sound really upset.
The fact is, aviation (ie: airline flying, operations, costs etc) are changing rapidly, and yes, those that expect rapid advancement to the top rung of the salary ladder will, now and in the years to come, find that the ladder is rather shorter than it has been in years past.
Fact...not fallacy.
Those airlines that cannot get a handle on costs, wherever based, will just have to adapt, or fade slowly away.

Lets see....
PanAmerican
Braniff
Eastern Air Lines
TWA
Sebena
SwissAir

All failed carriers. And to this list we could have added Continental, until rescued from the brink.

The employees lost their jobs. Vendors failed.
Did the management of these failed companies suffer?
Yes, i'm sure Harding Lawrence (CEO Braniff) had a really hard time keeping his $5million house in Alcapulco.:yuk:

Those sitting at the top of the seniority list at aircarriers that have not come to terms with updated cost-effective management style, will find themselves out of a job, sooner or later.

If you think you are worth $250k a year commanding a B747, you are dreaming.

Dream on McDuff.;)

[412A]

your assessment of my value is of no consequence, neither is it in respect of those men and women who do Captain 747's. Funny you should mention Continental. It was only when Gordon Bethune took over and scrapped the deluded and destructive 'bottom line' policies of the Lorenzo era that Continental was resurected into the best airline in the US. Their pilots are now (other than Delta) the highest paid, most motivated and most satisfied pilots in the industry. Could it be that Gordon, being a pilot himself, understands that an employee has a worth greater than the absolute bottom line...? Continental is now considered the best airline in the US industry, and it did it completely counter to your lame and tired ideas. Your ideas 411 were discredited 15+ years ago when the Lorenzo experiment was shown to be an abject failure. Why is it that you can't see that your ideas represent recent history that has been consingned to the scrapheap.

...reading some of your 2500+ posts (good grief...!), it seems that you truly, and sadly have no life other than to type away thinking you are contributing anything constructive to the issues of aviation. I will not be answering to all your posts because, unlike you, I do have a life beyond inane rantings based on bitterness and failure. Over to you McFly.

[Final 3 Greens]

Hi 411A

I see that you are still posting with all the goodwill of the ghost of Christmas [future.]

By the way, remind us how long you were a Concorde pilot for?

Funny that all the Concordes will be prime attractions at museums and will captivate future generations of children, who will become the pilots of tomorrow, whilst the technologically advanced TriStar is the type now assisting in the distribution of Milwaukee's finest :D

[411A]

Well, Final 3 Greens, Concorde was parked simply because it could not cut the mustard, cost wise.
Too expensive, too old, obsolete.

Gosh, sounds like BA.:E

Oddly enough, ten TriStars are in the process of being re-activated, and expect more to follow.
Meanwhile, Concorde is a doorstop in several museums.

[Final 3 Greens]

Hi 411A

Nice to see that your mind is still working, despite my suspicions of Alzheimers ;)

Ah yes, the failed Concorde feasibility study..... 27 years long - there's no dishonour in becoming obsolete dear old thing, we all do eventually, some sooner than others.

I hate to get bitchy, but the list of failed airlines you mention does seem to have rather a lot of American names on it and very few British ones.

The average lifespan of a Fortune 500 company is 40 years - BA is now 31 years old and working through the issues that face large corporations. However, it has one of the best global brands and this will be more significant in its survival than many realise.

[411A]

Well F3G, sure hope so.
Some of the nicest folks I have met world-wide have been the early-out BA guys...at other companies.

They have all mentioned that...they were coddled in the extreme.

Wonder if it is still the same?:confused:

[Final 3 Greens]

411A

Merry Xmas!

[TwoTun]

411A



I think it was Mark Twain who said:

"It is far better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid, than to open it and remove all doubt"

[BEagle]

"There has never been any proven evidence of a " dirty tricks " campaign in ba......."

What utter nonsense. Just ask Marshall. Or King. or the Gatwick Helpliners. Or the passenger poachers. Ask about Operation Covent Gaden....

[Final 3 Greens]

Nice to hear from you BEagle ... you're still on earth.

I was working in Prague this week and one of my local contacts told me 'tomorrow zey vil fire BEagle to Mars." Bloody hell I thought - whose going to give us the gen on the Belgrano from now on ;)

[PAXboy]

maxy101So PAXBOY Would that be a good or a bad thing for currently serving BA pilots?Uumm, I did not say that it would be! No, it would not be good but it is on the cards. Did you actually read what I wrote??
That is not what I want to see, I continue to say that BA is a fine airline on which to be a passenger (as my PPRuNe name states) but providing a good passenger experience is not enough and what I have described could easily happen.

As F3G said: The average lifespan of a Fortune 500 company is 40 years - BA is now 31 years old and working through the issues that face large corporations. Big companies have a natural lifespan. Some live longer than others but there is always a limit. Boeing, for example, are moving into the next chapter of their existence and, as has been said, the Russians and Chinese are moving up to compete with Airbus.

I doubt that BA will survive in anything like it's present form in 10 years. Changes and (probably) mergers are needed, with individuals and governments needing to decide if having some people employed is better than none.

[renfrew]

I would suggest that BA via BOAC and Imperial is actually 84 years old and will be around for quite a while yet.

[Final 3 Greens]

Renfrew

BOAC/BEA were govermental bodies, so BA has only been around as an entity since 1972 (full integration 1974) if we are talking about corporate lifecylces.

The bloodline, however, is a different matter and I would welcome another 84 years or more :O

[Lucky Strike]

Hi 411A,

I don't disagree with what you say, bit near the bone for some though.

But the reason for this post is; what Tristars are being brought back into service and for whom?

[LGS6753]

What BA needs (in managerial terms) is for some (more) of its non-core functions to be out-sourced.
Out-sourcing moves people out of the expensive pension scheme, away from lifetime perks, in to smaller, more focussed businesses who rely on service provision for survival. Head Office wallahs rely on politics for survival.
So what about outsourcing (for example) check-in, recruitment, PR, aircraft maintenance, website development, and literally hundreds of other functions.
Done carefully, it can revolutionise a company, but the company can retain and improve its innovative edge and customer care.

I have personal experience of turning round an ex-nationalised business, and restrictive practices and 'comfort management' issues have to be tackled head-on.

BA's a great airline with a great future, but nearly 20 years on, it still has vestiges of state ownership about it. That's got to change for it to unlock it's future potential

[411A]

bat.man,
Mostly for Jordanian/middle east operators...Air Rum, Star, Air Universal, and a few more.
Problem is, many have no prior operating experience, not to mention maintenance know how, (never mind spares), so don't how long they will be operating.

TwoTun,
So, have you accepted the senior CC position yet?:E

[ccrew21]

QUOTE
Your post certainly made me smile ;-) but look at the evidence:

World first transatlantic jet service
Worlds first supersonic passenger service
Worlds first fully flat bed in First Class
Worlds first fully flat bed in business class
One of the first airlines to offer e-ticket, the first to offer it on international routes
First airline to put 100% of its staff through a putting people first programme and revolutionise its service delivery
First airline to employ a specialist wine buyer and leading international chefs to gain competitive advantage with superior food and wines bought at lower prices
First airline to offer four class service on international longhaul routes so offering an enhanced economy option
Worlds first personal video library on board in First Class
World's first well being in the air programme
World's first on board internet and email service
World leading flight and cabin crew training facilities used to train over 100 other airlines worldwide
First airline in the world to automate back office processes using e-forms and other e-working initiatives
BA's Waterside HQ was one of the first buildings in the world to provide a wireless infrastructure, so enabling workplace mobility
State of the art world cargo facility opened at LHR
BA has also recently won the best airline travel award for the 16th year in succession along with 6 other awards including best First Class and Best Business Class.

For all its faults, BA has demonstrated time and again its ability to surprise the industry. Personally I hated most of the ethnic tailfins, but look out of your window at the liveries of many of the world's airlines and you'll see the influence BA has had and how many have followed their lead. BA is a company which continually reinvents itself because at the heart of it all it has a tremendously gifted, loyal, talented and passionate workforce who believe in it and wouldn't want to work for anyone else no matter how much money was on the table.

Desk-pilot

was just reading through this forum ad saw this post from desk-pilot- im BA cabin crew & reading this made me extremely proud. i am happy 2 work for BA & no im not one of the pre-97 employees on massive salary basic- im 21-moved 2 london 2 work for a company i have always looked up 2 & now i feel extremely proud & work my arse off- with a positive attitude, high moral, good sense of humour- to help keep BA succesfull- its people like myself & desk-pilot who keep spirits high when every1 else just has total sh** to say! thanks.

[ojs]

LGS6753, I agree with you that some functions could be outsourced and I'm surprised we haven't already witnessed the development of a "British Airways Ground Services" company - a wholly owned subsidiary of BA. Especially given the problems at LHR this summer. Perhaps because of militant union fear?..

There are two problems though:

(a) What do you do with the staff left behind at BA? There are a lot of "lifers" and redundancy is expensive for a cash-poor company.

(b) BA has a poor track-record in managing its outsource companies. OK, A1 (Amadeus) have actually done a good job in the RTZ/RTB migration - unplanned outages are at their lowest level ever - but my God it's hard work working with them! Look too at relationships with IBM, EDS and Omnetica over the years... Perhaps not as great as the Business Plan said they would be.

Incidentallly, talking of check-in, I've always thought it odd that bearing in mind it's perfectly possible to teach automated (computer) check-in course in 5 days and then feel happy to place those trained agents on a desk, why does it take BA so much longer to train its staff? The service is no better!

It's all a question of attitude.

If BA recognised that they could take 5 days then they could take on a load of temporary staff (read "students") over the Summer without any difficulty!

[HOVIS]

LGS6753.. Why not outsource the pilots too? :mad:

[TwoTun]

A confession;

after all this time, I never bothered with the "Ignore" list.

Now I've done I've taken the time to sort it out, and I'm 411A Free!!:D

Isn't technology wonderful?

TwoTun
thankfully out of aviation now the inmates are running the assylum.

[woodpecker]

A short survey... Are you "411A free"?

A simple post to the effect... I've used Pprune's "Ignore" function and I'm 411A free...it's great!

It really is!

Having got that off my chest, (and now outside looking in), It did concern me that an AML cabin crew (disguised as BA) were rostered two night sectors out of the Caribbean with no proper rest facilities. Mind you they needed all that time "on duty" to look after the 400 punters.

My next trip was an evening mailine departure to Tel Aviv (with about sixty passengers less and one crew member more). The first thing arranged by the CSD was the bunk rest timings. I think the figure ended up at over two hours!

How you sort it all out I don't know.

I don't obviously need to care (part 6, retired) but I still do!!

[sevenforeseven]

LGS6753
WHILE I AGREE SOME JOBS CAN BE OUTSOURCED IE BAGGAGE HANDLING/CHECK IN OTHERS CANNOT IE MAINTENANCE. IMAGINE FINDING SOMETHING LIKE A LOOSE BOLT, A BA ENGINEER WOULD JUST TIGHTEN IT WHILE A SUBCONTRACTOR WOULD SAY THATS XX.XX PLEASE.
IF YOU THINK OUTSOURCING IS A GOOD THING THERE ARE NO SUCH JOBS AS CORE FUNCTIONS EVERYTHING CAN BE OUTSOURCED INCLUDING CABIN ATTENDANTS/FLIGHT CREW/ENGINEERS, AND GUESS WHAT, BA MANAGERS WILL STILL BE IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE ALL IS BEING DONE CORRECTLY, SO WAKE UP STOP DREAMING, MANAGERS ARE WINNING AND WILL ALWAYS WIN. SORRY BUT THATS THE WAY IT IS.
ps I am not in a management position.

[JONSV]

I think BA outsourcing pilots would be a great idea!

That way we'd all be freelance and they'd have to pay us much more!

Imagine how much money all we pilots could make if we ALL banded together as one huge pilot agency with a complete monopoly!

Today the airlines, tommorrow the WORLD! HA HA HA!! :}

[HZ123]

I cannot see that at present there is a company larger enough to take on the ground handling operation. In addition you get what you pay for and it is unlikely that you will get a better service.

BA did much of these things before outsourcing MT , Vehicle service, IT, Security. Facilities and more. Many of these disciplines are now costing more and are porrly performed. We also tried service delivery level agreements for quality standards and that does not work either.

[TopBunk]

HZ123
BA did much of these things before outsourcing MT

..err, excuse me, when did BA outsource MT? Certainly not at LHR where they are one of the bigger groups of layabouts around. Restrictive practises right from the '60s abound, drivers doing limited numbers of round trips per day, hiding in poor radio reception areas when job done, not calling in when job is done, to change crew on one aircraft rotation at LHR often required 3, yes 3, buses. One for the inbound crew, 2 for the outbound (one collecting crew from Compass Centre and one collecting crew in the Central area). Frequently I find myself waiting for transport outside the CAT lounge only to see the cabin crew bus pass by - they will not stop - against their interests. They were also primarily responsible for the delayed implementation of the single crew bus for longhaul arrivals - cost them jobs/overtime. Rumoured that most of them are on £45K pa.

Did you know that BA have the second largest fleet of buses in the UK after Stagecoach?

The sooner that they sub contract MT or T5 is built the better.

Now as for baggage handling, by all accounts the managers aren't allowed into the department without union agreement. Heavens knows what practises go on in there - one shudders at the possibilities.

[colossus]

The truth is that the Judge of BA ultimately is the City, and the Jury it’s passengers

At the end of the day BA’s salvation can only come from within, across all business functions when the culture becomes focused again on delivering customer service and satisfaction, as more and more disaffected customers choose to travel with other carriers, as the market offers more and more choice.

It appears to be (as a mere humble PAX) an organisation with two very differing sub-cultures, a position that it can no longer afford (in truth it’s been a problem for many years), and the City will only tolerate for so long.

One culture is stuck in a time warp, believing that BA will provide (job for life, great pension position, outmoded working practices etc.), and that they have the most important job function in the company, be that in the air, on the ground, in an office, or boardroom.

The other has those individuals with a passionate belief in the organisation, the vision to realise that the solution lies by the whole company moving forward, and not apportioning blame else ware every time, and the realisation that it’s customers have and increasing choice of options, and that things need to change quickly.

This tread appears to have contributions from those in both cultures.

The hard task is to slay the old culture, either by converting those who current espouse to it, or remove these individuals from the organisation as quickly as possible, this task needs everyone to play their part.

I wish those contributing every success on what is going to be a long and painful 12-18 months, those who don’t want to contribute I suggest you stand aside because time is against you, and ultimately the City win, and their remedy will be ruthless in the extreme.

[PAXboy]

ccrew21: You list a truly wonderful range of milestones (although I would want to check details on one or two of them that would be nit-picking). The problem is not that BA have been so innovative and that they continue to win awards - it is that they can no longer do so at a reliable profit. As others have said, the City will withdraw support and take their money elsewhere. Then the share price falls, then they get bought up.

I think that outsourcing can reduce costs but I think it does reduce service. Over the past 23 years that I have been in a service industry (telecommunications) I have seen outsourcing at close range and from both sides of the line. I have seen it in America and the UK and Germany and I don't believe in it because service levels cannot be maintained.

All the words about the service company being focussed on delivery to the client slowly fades. The staff move their focus towards their own company and the their survival which, often works against the client. I have seen it at first hand. Service Level Agreements? Hah!

topbunk: Now as for baggage handling, by all accounts the managers aren't allowed into the department without union agreement. If this is true then they are in even deeper troubles that I thought! I may not be a fan of UK managers but if they cannot get direct access to what they are managing then someone has blundered.

colossus: The hard task is to slay the old culture, either by converting those who current espouse to it, or remove these individuals from the organisation as quickly as possible, this task needs everyone to play their part. Certainly it does but removing the old culture is nigh on impossible. I could describe this problem with regards to BAA but I am always bashing them so let me choose one from my own field.

BT have changed a colossal amount (sorry could not resist!) in the 19 years since the start of their privatisation. BUT to anyone who works with them regularly, you will hear and see that some of their 'core values' have not changed. There are still people in BT who think that they should be given certain contracts as they are - simply - BT. You will hear many BT people say, "Some parts of this company still act like they are the GPO and don't have to listen to anyone."

Does this sound familiar? Just like BA think that some passengers are naturally theirs and some departments think that they really are the world's favourite airline?

Once again, sorry to say these things but it is what I see.

[loaded1]

A huge 'thank you' to 412 for his eminently sensible ripostes to 411a that place him firmly in the context he deserves.

411a's habit is to ignore the facts and move to his own line of "spin" in nearly every reply he makes. Some are gratuitously offensive, (see threads related to former Concorde Fllight Engineers), and most seem motivated by a strain of bitterness that has nothing to do with airline economics and everything to do with a pathological resentment of the salaries that flightcrew earn.

People in this business have been savaged by factors far beyond any one entity's ability to control, and it is 411a's apparent glee at our collective misfortunes that I dislike most of all.

I reiterate my own position: if my carrier folds after all the years I've done in the seniority system and pension scheme I will leave the industry and never look back. I am not alone. My future was not compromised by my 'greed', but the arrogance of a chief executive who sacked any of his 'team' that dared contradict him and went on to beggar a fine airline by mortgaging it to the hilt, £4.8 billion to be precise.

Among my peers who are not in aviation I am the worst paid and have taken the longest to reach the peak of my profession. This may be 'the market' at work, yet even when we were at our peak as an airline I earnt an average salary for the European industry, so it appears a one way bet.

Doubtless this is as 411a would have it be, but in the end if you have any self respect one has to start wondering if the job's worth it, especially if you chuck-in working for delusional tyrants like Bob A@ling and his under-performing Lieutenants, or indeed the likes of 411a, who appears to aspire to such greatness. There are other things to do.

If BA goes under I hereby promise 411a that I'll cheerfully post a reply to let him know how I get on "out in the cold". Another of 411a's backround assumptions seems to be that everyone in aviation is incapable of doing anything else to keep body and soul together, such that they'll be queuing-up to be 'dissed' by the likes of him and his new airline.

It seems to escape 411a that the role model for the low cost airline sector, Southwest, is run by a charismatic entrepreneur who places the morale of his people at the top of the criteria that has made that company the most consistently profitable airline in history. 411a's potential bankers may like to take note of his very public views on the place an employee holds in the food chain.


If 411a can create employment in one of the worst downturns an already highly cyclical industry has ever seen, then I salute him. Perhaps with the aircraft in place and the reality of man management upon him, his views will change. I hope so, but I doubt it.

Meanwhile two factors give BA hope: the Government here has recognised the central role of aviation in creating prosperity through facilitating the interchange of commerce and the provision of leisure through tourism by providing the planning environment for vital airport growth to meet the ever rising trend demand for air travel. Reflecting this long term trend growth, BA's share price has risen such that BA is back in the FTSE 100. The Fat Lady has yet to sing, 411a: there is much hope for us yet and I know that everyone in BA will work to make that hope a reality.

As Christmas approaches, I send 411a every best wish for the success of his airline. I hope that it provides employment for many and him with the material rewards of entrepreneurship, as well as the necessary insights into human motivation and character that are essential to financial success.

[RRAAMJET]

One of the best posts in a long time, Loaded1; very thoughtful and well written. 411A could do worse than to read how to post without outraging the aviation community. Even when his posts contain accurate content matter, he has to cover them in an exo-skeleton of dung mixed with phasers-on-stun that many find unpalatable or unfathomable. I would have thought employee respect and credibility were important for management....

It's the presentation, not necessarily the content, 411a, that's riled the observers.

Kind of like watching the Washington Redskins....;)

[colossus]

PAXboy, as you are in agreement with the observation of the need for those within BA to adopt a culture more in tune with today’s economic realities as part of the pre-requisites to it’s long term survival, yet are extremely sceptical of it becoming a reality. Do you think that BA should perhaps start another airline along the lines of GO as a means of moving forward, say as a European carrier?

GO I guess had one advantage by being located at Stansted, in terms of cultural “contamination” from the less desirable practices of mainstream BA.

[Jet II]

Hmm???

BA's in the **** and £5 Billion in debt so who's to blame? - seems some think its 411A judging by the amount of posts attacking him:confused:

[411A]

Well, Jet II, seems some want to stick their collective heads where the sun doesn't shine...and lay blame elsewhere.
BA, and especially its management have only themselves to blame...it would appear that the 'Imperial Airways syndrome' is alive and well within the company.

The clock is ticking...for sure.:ooh:

[HZ123]

Surely, despite all the critism of BA much of which is acknowledged there are very few airlines (full service - long / short haul) that are in any better fiscal condition. The prospects of improvement in the industry look pretty flat for next year too. BA will still be around after many others have failed.

[PAXboy]

colossus: I continue to hope that BA will be around for many years to come. As HZ123 has just said, everyone is in difficulties. The reason that I am sceptical is that I have not seen many other large, mature, organisations turn themselves around, I hope that BA prove me wrong.

As to solutions? I think that GO was a very good idea and might have been the way to move back to a lower cost domestic/regional/short haul and separate the long haul full service. My reason for supporting that split is that the BEA/BOAC merger was politically driven not operationally so. The arrival of the LoCo operators has changed European services in a way that could not have been anticipated. As an aside, Eurostar finds itself with the same problem as it did not know that LGW/STN/LTN would be offerring return fares to CDG/ORY/BRU at less than 50% of their standard fares and their fares were going to undercut mainline fares. Since GO has been sold and the market already consolidating, there is no chance of launching another in this category. I suggest that the management were far sighted in starting it and short sighted in selling it.

What to do? Long haul will also have some LoCo operators trying for the Laker SKyTrain model and so the competition is going to be tough. If you reduce routes and frequency - you reduce income. Assets have already been slimmed and trimmed and leased-back and what have you. This leaves salaries. I am not aware of any company in recent years that has been able to reduce salaries and benefits by up to 20% without hideous amounts of strike action. Humans just don't work that way. They only reduce this component when they are in administration or when relaunching after being merged.

The European market of full service airlines is over capacity. In my own field, telecommunications, I have seen consolidation that has taken my breath away. In this country and others, I have seen proud names vanish. Some that used to be considered the 'national flag carrying company' for telecomms.

Again, for those who don't read all my (admittedly long) post, I hope that BA prove me wrong.

[RRAAMJET]

"I am not aware....by up to 20%..."

Pax: how about AA? 23% pay cuts and further work-rule concessions - no strike, not in administration. Meanwhile the CEO was attempting to line his own pocket - still no strike when it was discovered. There's restraint for you. (CH11 would have surely followed, however...)

Now Don Carty sits in his new $13 mil house in Canada writing sniping articles to the newspapers about it wasn't his fault, it's all the employees fault, blah, blah. Leadership, eh?:yuk:

He even got asked to be guest speaker at SMU Business school recently - ha, ha, ha. This from a man who apparently thought skipping the Business Ethics classes at Harvard would be cool...:mad:

[PAXboy]

RRAMJET: Thanks for the info, I am sure that AA will benefit. If BA can only start cutting the mngt jobs then they will be heading in the right direction. My guess is that it's easier to lay people off than it is to get people to reduce their salary - even if that might be better for all in the long term and save on redundancy fees.

Not surprised to hear about Carty, modern management thinks that when things are not going well, all that is needed is Just a bit more management. :rolleyes: In this regard, they are like dictators who keep shooting people until there is an uprising and he is overthrown. Works the same in companies. Except that, rather than spilling blood directly, it is indirect.

[411A]

RRAAMJET is right, the AA guys took the big hit, and suspect it will pay off big time in the years to come.
Meanwhile, 'tis a shame that Carty and company are not on the inside looking out...of a jail cell.
Just like Harding Lawrence at Braniff years ago, running the company into the ground with very big expensive executive perks does not inspire confidence in 'management'.

[RRAAMJET]

I'm a little too young to remember the Braniff demise details, I'm afraid, 411A, (in the UK RAF back then), but I suspect from what I've heard you are absolutely correct. Tom Braniff died in '54, right? So he wasn't around to see the shambles...:(

[bunk exceeder]

411A

I'm afraid it appears that your small head took over from the large one some time ago. Perhaps you should obtain a copy of Gordon Bethune's "From Worst to First". It will confirm all of what 412A correctly pointed out. Oh, and it's SABENA with an A.

And let's not forget that cabin crew are one of the biggest tangibles in an industry full of intangibles. BA have a great reputation in the US not only for the product at BA, but also for the service, courtesy of those same cabin crew. My 16 year purser wife does not make anything like the top end of cabin crew pay in the US, but works her can off, even though she has no control over her life. Let's not be too quick to take aim at any group of employees who actually do something when we all know that it's management that got BA in this mess in the first place.

[ZQA297/30]

I am not an accountant, I am just a professional pilot who has had some management experience quite some time ago.

Having been through several iterations of the "too expensive" game, I have yet to find anyone who puts facts and figures that define the parameters of what is not "too expensive", in other words a target to measure progress against.

When asked as to what the targets for crew costs or productivity are, they are "lower" and "more". When asked why, the answer is invariably "otherwise the airline will not survive".
Why employee costs, especially flight crew? Presumably because they are easy to get at, and the "high" pay is an emotive button with the public.

Scarce or absent is any analysis showing that ratios of management/worker costs should be in a particular range, or that equipment costs, finance costs, or mtce costs, for example, should fit certain norms, only the mantra that "employee costs are too high".

I have a problem with these conveniently trotted out slogans, as it would appear that in many cases they are used to obscure the fact that insufficient research has been done, and the real problems have not been isolated.
Should employees be made to sacrifice to carry other areas of inefficiency, and should they be given a say in the recovery process they are paying for?

Would some of the gurus care to comment on this?
Perhaps 411A could give us some insight to the missing numbers, he seems to know a lot on employee compensation and airline management.

[411A]

ZQA297/30

Fuel cost....18%
Crew cost....16%
Crew training...8%
Debt service...6%
Admin......8%
Aircraft, maintenance, insurance, landing/overflight/parking etc.... 22%

Return on equity...13%
Other......9%


Our numbers only.
And yes, the officers in the company earn top dollar, because we are responsible to the investors.

Also available 24/7 to handle any problems.
It's called TCB...take care 'o business.

Would BA match these...hardly, but then we are in a niche business.

With us....the buck stops here, because otherwise there ain't no one else.

[expat100]

Remember this:

Ansett was an institution in OZ.

It had a huge debt.
It had a workforce who were years in the job.
It had the wrong fleet mix.
It had competition.
It had your boss for a while.
It went bust.

[loaded1]

Well EXPAT 100, your point is?

I reckon Ed Roddington is very motivated to make BA survive precisely because of his anteceedents. The debts he inherited weren't of his making, one has to add.

If we go under it'll be A@ling's legacy to BA that did it.

411a - I give in: I cant find your airline on the web, unless its the mysterious Pittsburg- based "Project Roam", so what's it called, where its base, how many Tristars,(or whatever), have you got, when do ops start, etc etc?

Happy Christmas to all.

[Lucky Strike]

I'm sure Roddy is well motivated;

But he sold GO to 3i who in turn sold it on for vast profit, ruined his opportunity with BACX and allowed City Flyer to amalgamate with BA thus ruining his low cost base in LGW

[Hand Solo]

He sold GO at a vast profit for BA at a time when nobody was queing up to buy it. The fact 3i later sold it to Easyjet for even more profit is immaterial. At the time of the first sale there was no guarantee of any other future buyer. Seems like an opportune business decision to me.

[411A]

loaded1,
Already started as reported here on PPRuNe, and located not in PIT....was there once, didn't like the place at all. Ugh!
Try half way 'round the world.
Keep looking...and a very Happy Christmas to all!

[412A]

411A. What is your company's name? Where (exactly) is it located. Who is the CEO,CFO? What ownership stake do you hold? Who is on it's board? What routes does it fly? What jurisdiction is it certified through? Where are the public records available to view? When are you going to stop taking those pills?

[Turbo Rick]

Hand Solo... you have given me the best laugh for ages... :p But whatever you do, for your collegues sake, don't enter BA management.... :rolleyes:

[mgc]

An interresting thread. Its a shame so many people knock 411A all the time. He certainly talks *** a lot of the time, but he also seams to be some what more enlightened than most on the hard facts of business.

If a business needs to reduce cost, where do you cut? Most costs are fixed and are out of the managements control eg fuel, interrest payments etc. If you can flog the company silver you can reduce interrest payment by reducing debt, but that's all.

When management want to reduce costs they look to 'controllable' costs. The biggest controllable in any organisation is staff. You may not like this but it is true.

So how do you reduce contollable cost in an organisation that is dependant on lots of staff? The answer is easy, raise productivity, reduce numbers to the bear bones, reduce pay and perks etc. ie sweat the assets, that is why personnell is now called 'human resources' in most companies because the staff are just another assett to sweat and then throw away when they are exhasted/ worn out/ broke. Not nice but true. Do not forget that a directors primary obligation is to make maximum money for the share holders. Therefore the the directors are obliged (by the companies act?) to drive their staff as hard as possible in the same way that they do their planes, cars etc.

The directors are kept in check by employment laws, unions, local agreements etc. AND the need to retain staff. Now when staff are in short supply you can not treat them too badly because they leave. When there are potential well trained staff queuing up to join the directors can push the staff harder as the losses can easily be replaced. Until staff turnover has a marked impact on the companies ability to operate the directors can keep turning the screws.

A while back someone asked 'how do you measure productivity' and what level of productivity do you need to achieve. The answer is easy, all the time there is scope to turn the screws the senior management are obliged to seek higher productivity.

Now consider BA. The new competition are lean and mean. There's plenty of thread about how squeezy is pushing their staff to exhustion, but they still have no shortage of would be staff. As the low cost carriers and BA have the same fixed costs (BA however has higher debt to service) they need to have similar controllable cists in order to be able to compete. The problem is BAs controllable costs (staff) are considerably higher than the low cost carriers. Higher here means cost per route mile flown, not just £'s per year. Again the low cost tend to get more flights per day out of their staff and pay them less.

So is BA doomed? Not necessairly. There is one way that BA can survive with lower productivity/ higher wages and that is, in the words of James Dyson (vaccuum cleaner man), 'to work smarter' ie to add somthing the low cost carriers can not. It is my belief that BA do this in terms of quality of the product on offer. This can be in terms of qulaity of food, cleanliness, looking after he punters when things go wrong etc. These extras have a tangible value and do justify BA charging higher fares than say Ryanair. The Big question is 'what are the extras worth to joe public'? BA will never compete with the punter who wants cheap as chips as long as I get there sometime, but there is a market that is preparred to pay a bit more for the improved quality.

However, once BA staff accept they do not have an automatic right to their better terms and conditions and accept that they need to work to protect them, the better for everyone. There is nothing more frustrating than to market a product on quality and then watch it all be binned because one member of staff insists on following a local agreement (that many would love to have) to the letter and results in flights being delayed or cancelled and all the problems that causes.

My experinces of BA flights is that they can be the best or the worst. In order to survive they need to become consistantly the best and so justify their costs. However, do not expect the BA management to ever say 'that's it guys, we've achieved the cost savings/ productuvity we need. Now we can relax and enjoy the job'. It will not happen, the goal posts will always be moving. It's a fact of life, accept it, evolve and survive or slowly slip away and die.

I will now done my hard hat and await the flack.

[RRAAMJET]

Mgc, I don't think you'll get much flak for that - deep down I think many of us realize you simply posted some harsh realities. I particularly agree with the comment about one person wrecking the best efforts of a whole team to bring about customer satisfaction, I've seen it happen in the US many times. I always ask the employee rsponsible "what was that all about? Why target the passenger?" Frequently the misguided reply is the hope that the pax will relay the employee frustration to management....never seen that work in 4 airlines - all you end up doing is losing another source of revenue and getting one more of your colleagues laid-off. And infuriating those of us trying to make the best of these unpleasant times for the airline and its patrons.... :mad:

There is a phrase for the current economic environment that the airline industry is battling through: WAL-MARTing

Great for the price conscious, cr@p for the employees.

Having worked for Roddo in the past, good luck to all at BA. He's an unusual chap - good to have a social drink with, never forgets a name or face, Mr Hyde as a CEO. Much like Mr Arpey at AA, Roddo is going to have to tackle monstrous errors made by predecessors; he'll probably have the full weight of the financial lenders and politicians behind him - heaven help any union that tries to de-rail plans (and no public support - remember, we're dealing with the WalMart effect here).

[expat100]

Well put MGC

However staff costs are not the only problem, and I remember the Pan Am staff taking cut after cut and they still went down.

Competing against the LCC's is very difficult on cost.

I wonder what the difference in cost is for Ryan Air's landing and handling fees against BA.

Also they picked up their equipment for a lot less and are always hunting around for cheap GSE etc. etc.

Are BA using their muscle to get the fees down and what do they pay BAA every year. Are BAA listening and do they believe that the golden goose can die?

You say they BA have to be different and offer a different product, what happened to Concorde then?

If you are carrying the mass market in the back of a tube, and its the same tube that the LCC's are using, how can you make it much different?

[HZ123]

I am amazed that BA continues to draw so much attention from you closet financiers, that make every solution sound so easy. I hardly thing Mr Dyson has much to show us as his products are no better than those costing a third of the price, apart from the choice of colours. Interesting you mention Dyson as that is where Mr Bob Ayling now resides as CEO.

During his reign at BA the media spent much of their time bemoaning his tactics and lack of ideas. At least he was more visible than Rod our current Lord Lucan.

I think you may find that BA is well aware of its problems and costs but unlike our American cousins we do not enjoy so many financial perks (Nor BMI or Virgin accepted) and sweetners. In January we will dump a further tranch of staff but sadly I fear the regions will take the brunt of the cuts (least resitance).

As for the future as one mentioned it may be that like PA and TWA, BA may have nearly run its course and there may not be room for it in the foreseeable future.

[411A]

Well Happy New Year, 412A,

Mentioned the companies name on PPRuNe before, do a search, and don't expect others to do the work for you.
Be resourceful.

Give you a hint, altho privately owned, is organized in a state where Howard Hughes once owned a large chunk of... real estate.
Having said this, Howard owned a lot of businesses, in many states, including a premier medical institute in Florida.

[windscreen]

Is it something to do with the fact that BA employ round about 200 staff per aircraft they operate and EZ a little under 50. I've just retired from one and about to join the other so guess I might find out

[Maximuss]

:( Christ, will you PLEASE stop the point scoring! :{

This thread has some worthy opinions, including those from 411A, I don't see why his opinions should be rubbished just because you don't agree with them.:ooh:

For your part 411A, if your attitude to your staff is like your attitude on the Pprune, then even if you are respected :} I doubt if you have many friends.:O

Good luck to all in BA, and more so to those of us in BACX - we fear we are in the front of the front line when it comes to next year's cuts - not that there's much left to cut...........:ugh:

[nurjio]

mgc - a bit sad to see ypu posting at such a dramatic time of the year; however, fear not said he etc...that was a gud un. The point about a single person wrecking the good work of an otherwise sound effective was particularly visionary.

[411A]

Maximuss,
'Tis an old PPRuNe stratagy, don't like what's said, attack the messanger. Note 412A's response above, quite typical of the type.
To be ignored, of course.
BA is like several large companies in the USA (not necessarily airlines either), they have grown top-heavy with middle/senior management. This needs to be reduced drastically, otherwise the newer carriers will eat BA for lunch.
Of course, full service airlines, flying to many overseas destinations will have more employees per aircraft than the low cost carriers...unless many of those functions are outsourced, a time proven way to reduce costs.
PanAmerican didn't outsource to any great degree, EAL likewise, and suspect SN didn't either. All gone now.
Of course, one can carry outsourcing too far, HP for example with their maintenance. The FAA was not pleased either.
Flight crew...kept in house.
Cabin crew, in house as well, but on fixed term contracts, renewable at the discretion of management.
Aircraft engineering, in house...except at outstations as required.
Flight ops support (dispatching etc), kept in house.

Nearly every other function could be outsourced, and in many cases, at significant cost savings.

Drastic action....yes, but may well be required for the survival of BA.

[woodpecker]

The "ignore" that Pprune provided facility means all the inputs from 411A are displayed as...

This person is on your Ignore List. To view this post click [here]

I never click [here], join me and lower your blood preasure.

[412A]

411A....still waiting for the reply to the questions asked....?? Or, just drop by Goldies for a beer and tell me yourself...

[woodpecker]

I won't see it 411A (Ignore list) but I bet you couldn't answer the questions!

[unmanned transport]

Can anyone give us an accurate count on the number of aircraft currently operating in BA's fleet. I have a figure of 230 aircraft but that survey was taken in July of this year.....thanks.

[Maximuss]

Hate to say it,

BUT:ugh:

No point shooting the messenger here. 411A has a lot of perfectly valid points' I work for effing BA, so I oughta know.

Slagging him may well be a stress reducing episode, but it doesn't address any of the real world's problems.

The worst thing is the guys ignoring him......errrrr, sleeping thru the alarm clock don't help the basic problem of getting into work on time either..... :rolleyes:

[ojs]

Unmanned, check out

http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/69/69499/bafactbook/ba_fact_book_section3.pdf

Or other interesting facts in a similar vein at:

http://www.bashares.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=69499&p=IROL-factbook


HTH, ojs.

[unmanned transport]

Thanks, OJS.

The latest stats. that I have are from Air Transport World research which shows BA having 237 aircraft in July of 2003.

[Preppy]

Well I've got different figures for BA's fleet:

Summer 2003 245 aircraft, with a "plan" for:-
Summer 2004 225
Summer 2005 231

all subject to a "health" warning!

[unmanned transport]

I wonder if the Sky Marshall requirement will hurt BA financially?