GB and B.MED pilots to join th B.A seniority list

['round midnight]

The latest is that GB and B.MED are actively negotiating with B.A to join the B.A seniority list.

Well that's the latest rumour and this is a rumour forum, so can anyone (GB/BMED guys) shed some light?

What do B.A, GB, B.Med and BACX (who have been told 'no joininf ba seniority) pilots think of this?

[pilotatlast]

Well if BMed and GB get on the list before BACX then I think you will see some heavy industrial action on the part of BACX pilots. I think BACX are a long way off the list but who knows stranger things have happened!

[Blackball]

Why not, the more the merrier. Balpa will be quite pleased although actively denying that fact.

[pilotatlast]

I know it would make sense! Currently a surplus in BACX so if they go on the bottom of BA seniority list, BA will get a know quantity in its pilots and will then also get access to the regions(in terms of commands) and the BACX crews will be able to freely bid into mainline. Any future recruitment that takes place can be through BACX and a new joiner will be frozen to BACX for say three years before being able to bid into mainline. There you go easy! I´m sure BA `Balpa would welcome this!:O

[ETOPS]

As a BA pilot I would welcome all these groups onto the main seniority list. We have already been joined by Dan Air and City Flyer so the more the merrier. It would allow those joining to bid for a wider range of types and routes and also allow BA pilots an even wider choice as well. Such a large grouping of pilots would have quite a bit of muscle enabling them to stand up to BA management more effectively thus (potentially) improving all UK pilots terms etc.

[fiftyfour]

This is of course something that the BA pilots want - they want to fly all jets that have BA painted on the side - and a fair enough aspiration.
Most franchise pilots are happy with their lot, but would be happy to discuss the issue of a merger.

So, if BA guys want this to happen they will have to make it worthwhile for the franchise pilots. A promise that newcomers will be tagged onto the bottom of a huge seniority list in a big company, with serious financial problems (debts of £5 billion etc)and poor industrial relations, in exchange for being part of a friendly outfit where one is an individual with a name and where the companies are profitable, is hardly appetising as things stand at the moment.

If the final deal is merged seniority, equal pay, equal conditions, equal status for equal professionals - franchise pilots would probably help to persuade the shareholders of the franchise companies to agree a merger of all the cockpit workforces. Lets see if BA Balpa are up to the task.

If not - forget it.

[Man Flex]

Yawn!

BMed and GB pilots will not allow a merging of the two/three seniority lists which would result in an erosion of their terms and conditions.

To go from being a F/O, number one hundred on the seniority list with an eye on a jet command within one or two years to being number two thousand on a seniority list where the prospects of a command at all are practically non-existent is not a serious option.

This is all being driven by BA pilots, probably F/Os who see no prospects of command therefore feel that they can be stolen from franchise companies elsewhere as they have done at GSS.

The difference here is that Bmed and GB have full Balpa recognition and will not allow this to happen without serious repurcussions.

Both these companies have had the benefit of seeing BA destroy careers and lifestyles in Cityflyer, British Regional and Brymon.

Balpa are fully aware of these issues and the concerns that have been voiced.

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

I have to say that I think this rumour is incorrect. It is nevertheless true that GB's managing director will be meeting with BALPA's head man, Jim Macauslan, imminently. I cannot imagine it is to discuss the price of fish!

There is no doubt that things are difficult for many companies at the moment and if you are a BA FO right now you could be waiting a very long time for a command. Their situation is exacerbated massively by the possible raising of the retirement age to 60 from 55 and no doubt when the time comes from 60 to 65. That is a 10 year hole where promotion will virtually cease and the 'fat cats' at the top will rob BA blind with excessive salaries. Inevitably eyes must drift elsewhere for promotion - and where better than the likes of BMed and GB who fly decent aircraft? If all else fails you could even apply to join the regions with BACX! The problem is that a master seniority list would almost certainly be extremely disadvantageous to current franchise FOs. Typical seniority for a GB FO is 2 - 3 years and they could never compete with BA FOs even if they were given their date of joining the franchise as a seniority date. In practical terms, not a single GB or BMed FO would ever hold a command in the company they joined as they would always be outbid by BA guys.

Amalgamation of seniority lists is a fraught business as the City Flyer Express case showed. The City Flyer guys have not been altogether happy about their lot, but the reality is that they got a fantastic deal. I heard the other day of one bloke who was a 146 captain who was forceably moved to the 777 as an FO and picks up long haul captain substitution pay! Nice work if you can get it!

The GB franchise is due for renewal in about 4 years. Having missed the opportunity to sort out a scope agreement with BA BALPA a couple of years back, the management at GB have got themselves in a very precarious position which has seriously disadvantaged their pilots. The nearer the renewal of the franchise comes without an agreement on seniority ist amalgamation, the less bargaining power GB will have against the power of BA BALPA. JP is now being forced to meet up with Jim Macauslan and hopefully will sort out some deal that will not leave the current GB pilots between a rock and a hard place in 4 years time. BA have GB by the throat and are preventing them from expanding or advertising in their fight against the low cost operators. Having led GB from a great profit to the brink of its first loss, JP needs to start getting virtually any plan of any kind together to sort out the mess GB are getting into. It could and should be a stunningly successful company, but a succession of unimaginative decisions from the commercial side of the house coupled with virtually no advertising have put GB in a tricky position. One can only hope that the owners take notice of what is going on and inject some sharp vision into the company before it is too late.

[ETOPS]

Fletch

I heard the other day of one bloke who was a 146 captain who was forceably moved to the 777 as an FO and picks up long haul captain substitution pay! Nice work if you can get it!

Nearly right - It's his shorthaul Captains pay that is protected, slightly less than the equivalent LH rate.

[Torquelink]

Being an ignoramus, could someone enlighten me?

What are the pros/cons of merging GBA's and BMed's seniority lists with BA's? They may be franchisees but they are independent companies with, presumably, their own T&Cs. Presuming that both companies continue as independents why even consider merging the lists as it would seem a) this would reduce BMed/GBA's flexibility in negotiating T&Cs with their own pilots and b) would probably cause all sorts of dissatisfaction among crews over an issue that (to an uninformed outsider) doesn't appear to be relevant? I can see that if BA decided to buy the franchisees (as per BACX) then the issue becomes real but, in the meantime . . . ?

[Vasco]

I've got an idea:

All those from BACX, GB and BMed that wish to fly for mainline BA apply in the forthcoming recruitment camoaign and, if successful, welcome aboard! As has been said previously, the more the merrier.

If you're happy with your company as it is then stay there and continue being happy.

Everyone wins.

No offence meant to the GB/BMed guys, I'm just pissed off listening to the ex-CFE whingers/failures that have landed on their feet at BA and fail to see it.

[Man Flex]

Torquelink

The idea behind SCOPE, as I understand it, is that all BA aircraft (i.e. painted in BA colours and operating on a BA licenced route) are flown by BA pilots (i.e. all pilots to be on a BA mainline contract which means receiving BA terms and conditions).

This is all driven by BA pilots who want to have their cake and be able to eat it. It is BA pilots who see SCOPE as a way of getting commands earlier than they otherwise would by stealing them from elsewhere. No-one at GB or BMed is knocking on BA's door asking to be let in because they are perfectly happy with what they have. The lifestyle, the rostering, the pay. The only thing that BA have to offer is a final salary pension scheme and that, as I understand it, is no longer available to new entrants. If existing captains within these franchise companies were offered a BA mainline contract with a final salary pension and the opportunity to bid for any fleet within BA by having a merged seniority list then I'm sure most would jump at the chance. But what about the poor F/Os?

When you join a company such as BA or Britannia you accept that you will have to wait a considerable time for a command vacancy to appear as very few people leave. Why should BA pilots be allowed to bully independent companies into accepting agreements that only benefit BA pilots?

'Oh, these franchise companies should be thankful that they have been given business by BA and without BA they would not exist.' But these companies all existed prior to the franchising that was put in place by Bob Ayling. It suited BA back then to have franchise companies that paid a hefty annual fee for the right to operate BA routes in BA colours with BA advertising, BA marketing and BA ground handling.

So what has changed? Well now BA aren't doing so well. Poor staff relations, pension deficit and high overheads not to mention competition from low cost operators. In comparison these franchise companies are doing well financially and so BA pilots want a piece of the action.

Why can't BA leave these independent companies alone? They make money and provide BA with a guaranteed income. Any talk of merged seniority lists or even worse, a complete takeover, would see an end to all that as we have already seen with Cityflyer.

I invite comment from those BA pilots who are involved in this whole SCOPE issue...

[Big Dog's]

Vasco

I think you have missed the point-GB pilots are happy but their future is being put in jeopardy by the BA pilots and their SCOPE agreement. Not content with the security that it provides for them, BA pilots they are now coming looking for commands. Doesn't sound fair to me and it doesn't sound fair to alot of other people either.

[Jet A1]

GB and BMED come with cabin crew too -- What will BA do with these ?? :8

Bmed -- Why do we not hear very much from you boys and girls ? What do you guys think about these rumours which get stronger by the year ? :confused:

BA pilots should note that unlike CFE - We operate A320/321's so would a merger would be a lot less painful than CFE. :}

BA Pilots yet again show their arrogance, not only by considering using the SCOPE agreement to dump BA SFO's into the LHS within the Franchisees :* - They also think that we would be ever so grateful to join the long BA seniority list and sit around for upto 15/20 years for a command. :{

Personally, I am very happy, thank you very much, with what I have got ! :ok:


:hmm:

[Da Dog]

Judging by "round midnights" other "quality" gossip I would suggest he is another frustrated BA manager eating some pie in the sky.

;)

[EL_CORRUPTO]

Wake up fellows, the seniority system is a burden of the past century ! This crappy system will disappear sooner or later and will finally open the gates for a performance based assessment tool.

Ever wonder why this industry is suffering so badly?

Two reasons among others:
1) Seniority system
2) Unions


Cheers

ELC

[Spearing Britney]

But without seniority we are open to El Corruption are we not?

Don't much fancy landing on fumes all the time to get on the right side of a performance based assesment tool - which btw isn't a very nice name for a management pilot!

[Officedesk]

AT BMed they are in the process of expanding and making good profits. They are recruiting new managers, trainers etc. Also the majority of their routes and slots are their own and the investors are mainly foreign. Therefore they would seem unlikely to yield to pressures from BA at the current time.

However, never say never - it could happen. However, one huge difference over the GSS situation is that BMed have over 75% BALPA membership. Therefore, any deals made would have to be favourable to that 75%. If not then BALPA has a huge conflict of interest issue, will have a riot on its hands and probably end up losing most of its members in the smaller carriers and have a major problem for its future.

Let's see what happens.

On the other matter - Seniority is never seniority, their is always (rightly so) an element of merit.

Seniority is like democracy - it has its problems but it is the proven syytem that is the best of of a bad bunch of systems specifically for what we do. It has its faults but it works better than any other system.

Pure merit is fraught with safety and personnel problems. Pure seniority is likewise.

[Torquelink]

Max Flex and others,

Thanks for the explanation but further clarification please: is SCOPE driven by BALPA or by the companies? From the companies perspective I can't see any advantage in merging seniority lists and T&Cs - certainly not for GB and BMed as, I assume, costs would rise and flexibility reduce (I may be wrong of course) and for BA - who needs the hassle. However, if it is being driven by BA (for reasons I don't understand), is this something to be held over the franchisee's heads when franchise renewal comes up - i.e. sign up or lose the franchise? On the other hand, if it's being driven by BALPA then it would seem to me that they are interfering in internal company affairs that don't concern them provided, of course, that flight crews in the franchisees are generally happy with the status quo. Particularly when, judging by the BACX experience, merging of the companies and seniority lists etc seems to have generated so much ill will on all sides and turned a previously profitable franchisee into a (currently) loss-making subsidiary?

:confused:

[fiftyfour]

Man Flex talks about GB flying on 'BA Licensed Routes'.

For those that don't know:

The international route licences are awarded by the respective governments to GB Airways - not to BA because they are not BA routes.
All routes are GB routes (although a few of these routes have been flown by BA in the past, sometimes by BA itself under contract to GB ).
The slots are, and have always been, GB slots.
The aircraft are owned (plus some leased) by GB.
The capital to support the operation is provided by the owners of GB.
The crews and ground support are GB.
The engineering is done by GB (with some aspects contracted out to BMI and BA).
Handling is done by GB (with some contracting out to Iberia, TAP, BA etc, BA contracted to handle at LGW and LHR).
GB has been flying since 1931, it is not some fly-by-night dodgy little outfit.

GB pays a large commercial fee to BA for the right operate on certain agreed routes as a BA flight number in BA livery providing a BA standard service. This is a fixed sum which GB has to pay whether making a profit or a loss. GB pays an additional fee for each ticket bought through BA.com etc. Clearly it is a huge advantage to GB to market a flight under a world famous name that is renowned for safety, reliability and excellence (BA carry out regular audits of GB performance including check rides in the cockpit). Most routes would be unprofitable without big name clout.

The franchise comes up for renewal in Oct 2008. If the BACC force Rod Eddington to make a future renewal unworkable for GB, I think GB would align with another major carrier - lufthansa, easyjet, there would be plenty to choose from. GB would not just disappear.
It would be disastrous for BA at LGW - loss of traffic flow, check in jobs, presence etc. And for BA pilots hoping for a slice of the action at GB? They will have blown it, especially for themselves and their company, big time.

[maxy101]

Fifty Four Spot on!! It will be interesting to see if anyone in Waterside has the brains to see that. BA has a knack of annoying everyone in its business dealings, eventually to the detriment of all concerned.

[Red Snake]

Forgive me if I appear stupid, but how can you merge a seniority list between different companies? And even if you do, what's the benefit? Presumably BA pilots can't bid for GB/BMed routes or aircraft without resigning from one company and joining the other, and vice versa. And if BA need to reduce pilots, they can hardly start from the bottom of the GB seniority list, or vice versa. I could understand it if BA bought GB/BMed, but not unless. Different aircraft, different routes, different T&Cs, different crew, different companies. Or am I missing something?

[Man Flex]

Torquelink

is this something to be held over the franchisee's heads when franchise renewal comes up - i.e. sign up or lose the franchise?

Yes!! The BA Balpa pilots now have a say (under SCOPE) with regard to the running of the few remaining franchise agreements.

Officedesk

If and when the time comes pilots from BMed and GB (and Loganair?) should unite and show solidarity in this growing menace. I keep hearing how a small group of pilots would have no chance against the might of the BA company council and its three thousand strong membership. Why should this be so? Should Balpa not represent all individuals and airlines equally regardless of size?

[Officedesk]

Exactly the point man flex

If BALPA does not take care of BMed and GB pilots - with large majority membership and recognised status - then it does not deserve to serve non-ba pilots and must stop selling themselves as an organisation that serves the wider community. If pilots in these two airlines are not taken care of then I am sure members in other operators will get to hear about it, the majority of those should then rightly question why they pay subs to such a biased organisation.

Whilst a switch to BA could indeed be a good thing for all, most will not give up their commands or chosen lifestyle. Therefore, terms must be favourable. Do not make the mistake of thinking that these pilots with GB and BMed will not have a choice and must accept BALPA BA terms. We are delaing with A320/B737 qualified pilots not ATR! (absolutedly no offence meant to ATR pilots, it's just a fact that A320/B737 ratings are far more marketable)

Rest assured there will be a determinaton by the pilots in these airlines to make sure that, if this happens, it will be at favourable terms or not at all.

[Tandemrotor]

At the risk of rehashing the CFE arguments, would the same arrangement as pertained to their incorporation onto the BA seniority list (ie. as a block at the bottom) be seen as 'favourable', or 'unfavourable?

As for CFE, grandfather rights apply to one's current seat. This seems to have worked quite well for them. Certainly no captain loses out, copilots however would probably fall into one of two camps. Those close to a command with GB/BMed, who have no interest in the wider work available in mainline, would be disadvantaged, but may be compensated by a payrise?? (don't know how many this would affect, or time to command in those companies) Other copilots may prefer the expanded opportunities of flying on mainline fleets.

I appreciate the significant differences between CFE and GB/BMed, and I don't know what the potential pay rises could be.

Could somebody tell me how many pilots there are in GB/BMed?

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

GB has approximately 160 pilots. The situation is slightly fluid in that there are about 6 pilots joining in the next few weeks. Offsetting that, there are at least 2 guys working out their notice and a couple more have other jobs lined up but have not yet resigned.

[Sonic Cruiser]

How would putting BMed / GB pilots on the seniority list work anyway? Would this not mean common rostering accross the BA/BMed & GB Airbus fleets? That would be chaos and effectivly mean merging their rostering? Would it also affect BMed and GB's AOC's as if they had BA pilots onboard and vice-versa they would have to be trained in their SOP's etc. Sounds to chaotic to be viable. Unless it is just for the purposes of bidding between flights.
Then if a BA FO moved to a Command at GB/BMed would he be then payed by GB/BMed or continue to be payed a presumably higher rate by BA??

[Notso Fantastic]

A BA BALPA rep has denied this is taking place or that any talks are underway. Unless there is a startling change in the status of GB, it ain't gonna happen.
Did this rumour come from the same place as the daft one about BA selling 15 747s to someone (was it Cathay?). Since so many rumour boards had the same rumour going round in circles, nobody would take 'it's not happening, people!' for an answer.
But shame to pour water on another jolly bout of BA bashing!

[Human Factor]

It is BA pilots who see SCOPE as a way of getting commands earlier than they otherwise would by stealing them from elsewhere.

Er, about my A319 command at BHX .... would have happened next year if City Express hadn't poached the work. Pot, kettle, etc.

[MaxReheat]

HF

Most of the 'poached jobs' with Citiexpress at BHX are still firmly in the hands of the original BA residents - the natives don't get a look in. A RJ is probably there ready and waiting for you and your wallet to parachute straight into it.

There are 600 pilots who receive a monthly paycheck from BA who are not on the seniority list yet!

[MAGIC2]

HF makes an interesting point , would you not be flying in command of a new GB airbus based in BHAM , if SCOPE had been concluded satisfactorily two years ago ?
Those Airbus jobs in the regions should have been given to GB to operate on holiday routes which they seem to be good at ,but with us mainline pilots doing the flying . If we cant get rid of the ground based overhead generated by Waterside, then give the work to someone else who can , but the flightdeck must be mainline. Cut the Franchise pilots a good deal and lets get on with it , we really are making hard work out of this.

[Man Flex]

MAGIC2

Those Airbus jobs in the regions should have been given to GB to operate on holiday routes which they seem to be good at ,but with us mainline pilots doing the flying

but the flightdeck must be mainline

Why? Because the routes were operated by mainline pilots before?

If you want to give work away to another airline that can run the route profitably then you can't expect them not use their pilots to crew their aircraft.

Your attitude is very narrow minded in my opinion.

[Hand Solo]

Most of the 'poached jobs' with Citiexpress at BHX are still firmly in the hands of the original BA residents - the natives don't get a look in

Perhaps a little creative with the truth here. There were eighty BA flight crew based at BHX, are you suggesting that there are now 40+ BA secondees there? Not according to my information there aren't. Who exactly do you consider 'the natives' anyway?Prior to the RJs the BACX contingent at BHX seemed to consist of about three Embraers. BACX now crew the RJs with people pulled from other bases all over the country - hardly what you'd describe as native to BHX.

Those Airbus jobs in the regions should have been given to GB to operate on holiday routes which they seem to be good at ,but with us mainline pilots doing the flying

Why? Why not just keep them in BA, flying core BA business routes during the week and holiday charters on the sunshine routes at the weekends, all flown by BA pilots. Thats what BAR did a made a profit to boot. No need to get GB or anyone else involved.

[Big Dog's]

Great idea Hand!-now let me see.......BA short haul and profitbality? If the truth be known I would say that the Orange boys will be sucking the will to live from all of us before long. With that going on it seems crazy to me that the BA pilots should be stuffing a perfectly good company like GB.

[Hand Solo]

I think you'll find BA shorthaul at LHR has been breaking even for some time now and that will be officially announced sometime around May. Easy haven't been doing too well in the last 12 months though according to todays press. On the subject of GB, as somebody previously mentioned, there is no discussion whatsoever currently taking place about any merger of any shape, size or sort between BA and GB. Yes, BA pilots question why there is another company flying identical aircraft from the same bases in BA colours. They also know the two main reasons why it's taking place:

1) Higher overheads of BA due to management, cabin crew and ramp handlers.
2) Bob Aylings vision of BA as a virtual airline.

The problem for GB, and other franchises, are two-fold:

1) BAs overheads are slowly being tackled, to the point where short haul is much more streamlined and breaking even financially.
2) Bob's gone, and Rod won't wear franchising.

In the clear out of Bobs 'yes men', senior management have started to understand that the company cannot survive by contracting out its core business. The penny has finally dropped that in order to compete you cannot give the routes to someone else because they can do it cheaper, you've got to lower your costs so you can do them yourselves at a profit. The result is that the franchisees are being denied permission to operate new routes as management think BA can do them themselves, with Dubrovnik being a prime example. It's not BA pilots who are causing problems for GB, nor is it BALPA. They really don't have the influence. It is BA management themselves who are adopting a far more restrictive approach to franchising. The probable conclusion of this is that when the GB franchise contract expires it won't be renewed. By that time BA will either be profitable in short haul and able to do the routes itself, or bankrupt. Current indications point towards the former.

[Jet A1]

So why have BA jumped into bed with GB and Iberia regarding the Spanish routes if they are keen to drop the franchise --- Could BA mainline sucessfully compete with GB Airways.com and the orange brigade ?? Can BA afford to lose more key LGW/LHR slots from GB ??

BA are killing any expansion at GB by already stopping any expansion at the regions ie MAN, due to SCOPE and upsetting the BA apple-cart ! The MAN routes being GIB and MJV are GB's own routes and have no influence from BA.

The word I hear is that BA are giving LGW one final chance - Being this summer and if it doesn't work out then there is going to be big changes at LGW.

[Hand Solo]

BA aren't 'keen to drop the franchise'. The GB franchise has another four years to run, and commercial sabotage against our own interests would be rather stupid even for BA managers. They're hardly jumping into bed with the others either. GB and BA have a watertight four year contract and the Iberia codeshare has existed for some time on the Spanish BA routes from LHR. Also its not an issue of whether BA can compete against GB.com and Easy, it's more an issue of what GB will do if they are competing against BA, Easy and Monarch to that part of the world. GB are very much the minnows should it ever come to a four way contest. On the issue of slots, BA don't use any slots from GB at either LHR or LGW. GB utilise all their own slots, so any sale of those would have little effect on BA unless it allowed in competitors on those routes.

If GB want to run their own routes from MAN to MJV and GIB then they can go ahead and do it, albeit in their own colours and without the BA brand. When the franchise contract was signed it stipulated which routes GB would be permitted to fly in BA colours. BA management have decided they don't want GB flying anything outside those agreed routes. Not the BA pilots and not BALPA, its the BA management who make those decisions, and the instructions come from the top of BA management. If Scope has swayed their thinking then clearly Scope is working, and indeed why should GB be permitted to dictate where they will fly the BA colours, but somehow I doubt that the management would turn down any revenue stream right now unless it was at odds with their goals.

The word I hear is that BA are giving LGW one final chance - Being this summer and if it doesn't work out then there is going to be big changes at LGW.

That word has been heard every year since Pontius was a pilot. You could equally substitute LHR short haul for LGW. I'm afraid it gets zero credibility from me.

[Scottie]

Han Solo wrote,

Easy haven't been doing too well in the last 12 months though according to todays press


Just to correct a small point (picky I know!).

More No-Frills Flights

By Peter Woodman, Air Correspondent, PA News


A flight information company today admitted its figures indicating a big downturn in flights by low-cost carriers were wrong.

The OAG company had originally said there were 21% fewer domestic flights by no-frills carriers in the second week of March this year compared with the same period of 2003.

OAG also reported a 5% fall in the number of low-cost airline flights to and from the UK. The statistics were challenged by low-cost airline easyJet and today OAG published amended figures that showed the number of low-cost flights to and from the UK had in fact risen by 18%, while domestic flights had gone up 10%.

OAG said: “Earlier figures released this morning suggesting the number of low-cost flights were waning were inaccurate. Comparisons made with 2003 were invalid. This was due to the accidental inflation of the 2003 flight figures resulting from the double counting of easyJet and easyJet Switzerland flights.

“We are grateful to easyJet for questioning the original figures. Further analysis has identified a one-off computer programme error which affected the 2003 figures. EasyJet continues to be one of the low-cost airlines that goes from strength to strength.”

[Jim Kirk]

Hands Solo

Without GB, BA ain't nothing on the med routes.

You operated Malaga and couldn't make a penny out of it. You give it to GB and low and behold, all of a sudden it is a lucrative route and you want it back?

I've got news for you. Rod has realised how valuable the franchises are to the BA network, and we are here to stay. That's official.

When we make a loss (highly unlikely), BA don't want to know. When we make a profit (all the time) BA are standing there with eager open hands.

GB pilot's don't want any part of a BA seniority list. We've seen what happens to successful companies who have been merged or taken over by BA.

Your cost base is ludicrous and Rod knows it. He is doing something about it, so beeeeeware.:E :E :E

[maxy101]

Jim... Glad to hear Rod is finally doing something about costs....Perhaps BA will be able to afford the market rate now?

[Big Dog's]

Jim

I think you are unfair on our erstwhile colleague, Hand. He appears to be somewhat better informed than most people on these forums. I would take issue with him on the MAN-GIB/MJV routes. My understanding is that they were on the original franchise agreement and GB can fly them if it wishes. I suspect, unlike him, that the BA pilots do have influence and are exerting it in the shape of their SCOPE agreement. Whilst these routes would be allowable under the agreement no one wants to inflame the situation at such a delicate time for all. Unlike Hand, I think that the franchise will be renewed and GB will continue operating and making a profit on their own routes in BA colours providing a BA service. Unfortunately GB will not be able to expand as planned but I doubt that BA will expand in to all the routes that GB could operate and bring the BA brand to.

As for GB having to compete against BA if the franchise were not renewed-you're having a larf Hand! GB will simply sign up with the Orange competition and Easy will then dominate LGW (this is their plan for sure) and also have a few sots at LHR and a start there.

[Barber's Pole Bob]

I think a phrase which sums this up : - " Can't live with them, can't live without them!"

This being aimed at BA ! BA could and probably would screw themselves over if they drop GB !

[Mactor]

Hand Solo, If franchisees are being denied new routes why have BMed just started Khartoum 3 times a week and are starting Yerkaterinberg at the same frequency in May?

[Man Flex]

Mactor

I think perhaps that BMed have held (or obtained) the licence for these new routes and BA feel that that they can't fly them themselves due to capacity.

Certainly in the case of GB, as far as I understand, both GB and BA had licences to operate Dubrovnik, Algiers and Catania. BA chose to do them themselves for whatever reason.

GB had two options this year on Airbus aircraft which were not taken. They still have two options for next year and 2006. Clearly they expected further expansion which has not materialised.

It might be worth adding that a couple of years ago GB wanted to operate out of Manchester down to Gibraltar and Malaga. BA said that was fine but the aircraft would have to be crewed by BA mainline! Subsequently Monarch moved in and are now operating these routes almost certainly at a profit.

[Mark Lewis]

GB are starting a few new routes this summer and indeed did last season. Bastia and Ibiza spring to mind...

[overstress]

Capt Kirk:

<Your cost base is ludicrous and Rod knows it. He is doing something about it, so beeeeeware. >

We can't wait for Rod to do something about it.

What are you implying??

[Angus Meecoat]

Yeah they are two new routes but it is not expansion, it's because they pulled out of GRO and the second VLC rotation

[Phoebus]

So the BACC want to give everyone at BA the chance to fly franchise aircraft. I don't know what the BA F/Os are in such a hurry for? Why don't they just wait until they retire from BA and join a franchise as DE Captains... That seems the normal route!

Personally, I can't see anything in it for GB or BMed - other than screwing up otherwise successful businesses. It won't help BA either, as they currently win both on fees and passenger feed from destinations they can't service at a profit.

I look forward to getting BA long-haul command pay.. ..but I won't hold my breath!!

;)