BA Wages

[hayley_20]

Hi Everyone,

I know this question has been asked many times before but i'd just like to know if it's really true that BA LHR Eurofleet Cabin Crew take home around £1500 a month?

The reason i'm asking this is I start with them on 23rd May and currently live 45 mins from LHR, once my proper wages start coming through later on in the year i'd like to move closer to the airport so am trying to budget my money.

Thanx 4 your help x

[exmax]

Hi Hayley_20

I'm ex BA crew and was on eurofleet lhr 2yrs ago and yes, a pay packet of 1500 was a regular wage for me. The pay system can get complex with factors like how many trips you do, destination payments, CAT turnarounds, long day payments or starting before 7am and overtime (these payments are great:D ). I'm sure there are current crew on this forum who can verify this too.

For the 1st couple of months as someone has mentioned in another topic but related, is that for the 1st couple of months the wages are awful, but that's because there's no flight pay and a month in arrears.

[Flyingwise]

I'm short haul and I earn approx £1,000 NET per WEEK.

Anybody else wish to discuss what they earn or spend?

[NigelsFriend]

£1000 net a week? I doubt that very much! Been shorthaul myself and still working for BA and NEVER have earned anything in the region of that!

And i dont think ANY wages should be pronounced on this forum!

[flyingdutchman]

Dear Nigelsfriend,

I fear you've taken 'been had' ;)

Your last sentiments echo those of Flyingwise though.

[NigelsFriend]

Well, I just dont think its wise to speak about wages on a forum which ANYONE can look into. Crew always been seen as overpaid and underworked :\ !

[DarkStar]

Overpaid and Underworked - Really? :E

[CHANEL]

Well said!! No need to talk or compare wages .... just be happy with the fact that thousands of people bust their b---s to work as CC, be grateful, and that stuffs private!!

[flyingdutchman]

Dear NigelsFriend,

That's precisely what Flyingwise is saying...

[flyer55]

Eurofleet Lhr does get paid more than Eurofleet Lgw , however that might change with Willie Walsh coming in and the Tax mans ongoing investigation as EF Lhr are not on an hourly rate at the moment whereas EF LGW are which was part of the merger between Cityflyer and Eurogatwick. This hourly rate has been rising steadily recently in the last few months.

[BA Boi]

Flyer55,

Willy Walsh CANNOT change the way we in the NSP are paid as it is linked DIRECTLY to our contract of employment, and as such, only our BASSA reps or us voluntarily (through a ballot) can change that. If he wanted to effect any changes to this (or any of our other agreements) he would have to sack all of us (at the last count, approx. 12,000 mainline NSP crew) and employ us on a new contract. Not going to happen! Anyway, managements proposal of an Elapsed Hourly Rate was formally rejected at the BASSA branch meeting in October last year and BA formally accepted this in writing. EHR is dead in the water.
And also, the tax man has been and gone and new levels of taxation have been decided upon. There is none of this '...ongoing investigation...' that you mention. It's all done and dusted.

Anyway I'm surprised that you, Flyer55, aren't aware of all this information as you are always on the BASSA crew forum and must be in reciept of the last few issues of "BASSA News" where these issues have been explained and discussed at length.

Tut, tut! :rolleyes:

[keeperboy]

BA boi.....You are so right.

All this chit chat of 'Oh look what Willie did to the Aer Lingus crews!'. What bollocks. Aer Lingus and BA are as different as chalk and cheese.

For a start.....after Sept 11 Aer Lingus was widely tipped as being the next Sabena or Swissair and go 'belly up'. It was losing millions every day. The crews knew that if they didn't give into management demands there would be no job to come back to next week. Willie had it easy to reduce their salaries and benefits as that was better than no job at all!

Now look at the BA situation. Soon to announce profits of £565million and officially to become the 'Worlds Most Profitable Airline' . Does anyone really believe in light of these figures that Willie will have much joy in convincing BASSA that further cuts are absolutely necessary? I think not!

And with the AMICUS/TGWU merger soon Cabin Crew 89 (and their handful of members) will be no more within BA as it has already been acknowledged by Amicus, TGWU and BA that BASSA will be the sole official Cabin crew trade union.

As already mentioned our allowence system and union negotiated terms and conditions form part of the mainline contract of employment. For BA to try and change any of these without the crews OK will be in effect breaking our contracts....and the law.

Things probably will change a little in preparation for our move to Terminal 5, but only if it is with a bit of 'give and take'. Not only money but other things need to be looked at as well:
- Our rubbish (in comparison to other UK airlines) travel concessions
- A decent bidding system for longhaul crew.
- Look at mixed flying (for those who want to volunteer to do it).

[Lucifer]

- Our rubbish (in comparison to other UK airlines) travel concessions
Travel concessions do not form part of any contract negotiations within BA and never will do as the company will refuse to negotiate on them - ever. They are concessions that do not form part of the contract, and BA would rather remove them than negotiate them.

Your other proposals are all increasing in cost rather than cost neutral or negative - without that factor then good luck, but it won't happen.

Furthermore your contract is a civil contract so you have to sue them - they would not be breaking the law to breach the contract. They would simply be breaching the contract, unless it related to legal regulations or enshrined employment law.

BA may be profitable but it is precariously so due to its protected position at Heathrow - as restricted competition routes diminish, competition will rise and eat into profits. Any gains from the union will have to be matched with far more in productivity rises - you only have to ask other employee groups what they think of CC productivity.

Well, I just dont think its wise to speak about wages on a forum which ANYONE can look into. Crew always been seen as overpaid and underworked !
Without being the devil's advocate (how ironic), is that not an admission of the latter statement?

[keeperboy]

Indeed travel benefits to not form any part of our contract. But perhaps if BA were prepared to offer us a (much) better deal if might allow them to reduce monetary incentives to adopt new working practices. Our concessions are typical of BA. Thought up by someone sat in an office that suits someone sat in an office. I mean, how ridiculous that your cannot take your 'travel companion' of a flight that you are operating as they are not considered 'accompanied'.

As for BA's 'protected position' at LHR, what tosh! It is no more protected at LHR than LH is at FRA, IB is at MAD or AF is at CDG. In fact BA has less percentage of slots at LHR than LH, AF or IB do at their repective hubs. And none of those airlines have the likes of BMI or Virgin to compete with. I find it difficult to think of many routes at LHR that BA does not directly or indirectly compete with other carriers on. BA's results are more likely down to the hard work and consistent service that its 'protected position'.

Just check out the 'passenger opinion' pages at airlinequality.com to see what our passengers think of us.

A bidding system and mixed flying would definitely save BA money. Nearly every other airline in europe with a mixed long/shorthaul operation offers mixed flying. How can you think it does not save money? I am guessing you are NOT cabin crew and have pretty much no idea what you are talking about.

A scenario: BA is short of long-haul crew to operate a 767 flight to Tel Aviv. There are short-haul crew, sat at home on 'available' also trained on EXACTLY the same aircraft but cannot operate the flight, even though they are happy to do so. That person will stay at home and maybe not get called. The TLV might have to be cancelled. With mixed flying a scenario like that would not happen. Or on the flipside, BA is short of shorthaul crew to operate a 767 flight to Rome, but has longhaul 767 crew in the hotel on QRS (and volunteers to operate shorthaul flights). But as the system is now, BA has to use shorthaul crew on overtime and pay them £17 per hour plus allowences so the flight can operate.

As for a longhaul bidding system, sickness rates would be dramatically reduced if longhaul crew had some control over their mbt days (days off at base) and the odd preferred destination to fly to.

As for BA breaking our contracts they are indeed breaking European employment law. BASSA would immediately raise an industrial tribunal and BA would be found at fault. I could just picture it. 12,000 cabin crew would strike in a flash and indeed you are right, BA's profitable airline crown would indeed evaporate very quickly.

Perhaps a better place for Willie to start with his cost cutting is to get rid of Waterside offices, where no matter what time of day, the numerous 'coffee shops' in the lush water featured atrium seem to be full of office 'workers'. I mean BA is an 'airline'. What is essential to its operation is the pilots, cabin crew, check in staff, and ops staff. If I was at waterside I would be more worried about my pay and conditions that I am as cabin crew.

[concorde001]

"As for BA's 'protected position' at LHR, what tosh! It is no more protected at LHR than LH is at FRA, IB is at MAD or AF is at CDG. In fact BA has less percentage of slots at LHR than LH, AF or IB do at their repective hubs."

You are wrong there. BA is heavily protected as a result of Bermuda II , the treaty which limits the number of carriers that can fly from LHR to the US. At LHR, only UA, AA, VS and BA fly to the US, and BA hands down has the most flights and more destinations, in part due to the heavy slot restrictions. At FRA and CDG, AF, LH, DL, AA, CO, US, UA and NW all fly to the US and are allowed to operate to any destinations, eg Cincinatti, that cannot be operated from LHR. Because LHR is so heavily restricted (slot wise), VS cannot compete that effectively with BA - I mean BA operates about 7 flights to JFK daily, VS, only has 2/3!
Also, remember that when the US-EU sign an 'Open Skies' agreement (which I know seems ages away, BUT will happen), BA will have to be in even more of a robust position than it currently is, because it will be almost inevitable that LHR will have the following operators to the US: BA, VS, BD, CO, UA, AA, NW, US and even possible some European carriers like LH and AF!
So, BA should not be complacent...the next few years will see the Airline industry change rapidy, and BA must get its house in order even further if it wants a long term future. Of course BA has done brilliantly recently, but it needs to think long-term, and I think WW and BA management know this.

[keeperboy]

concorde, you are right. NO AIRLINE can afford to be complacent these days. As for BA's 'protected position' the only point I was making is that BA is no more protected in their home market than most other flag carriers.
Bermuda II that you mention covers only one country that BA serves. Yes, it has more flights from the UK - the US than any other airline. But so does Air France from France, and Lufthansa from Germany. Many other countries are also covered by bi-lateral agreements with the US (such as australia and loads others). And bi-lateral agreements also apply between other countries all over the world.
VIRGIN, UNITED AND AMERICAN ARE JUST AS 'PROTECTED' BY BERMUDA II AS ba IS, AND ALL BENEFIT HUGELY. Also Continental who codeshares with Virgin ex LHR. It isn't just BA's private party! Virgin may only have 2 or 3 flights a day to New York as you mention but this has nothing to do with BA's 'protected position'. It is entitled to use it's slots as it pleases and if Branson wanted to match BA's 7 daily new york flights he is more than welcome to.

As you already mention many european countries have 'open skies' agreements with the US. And yet, their flag carriers continue to dominate the route, despite it being open to anyone. Their flag carriers and their partners completely dominate them....AF/DL at CDG, LH/UA at FRA, KL/NW at AMS There is no 'Virgin' or 'bmi' equivelant in France or Germany. This is down to supply and demand. Just because anyone can fly a route doesn't mean that you can all of a sudden fill more planes.

We are constantly being told at BA that we have to benchmark ourselves against our competitors and that we are so much more expensive compared to Virgin or bmi crews. But how about benchmarking us to AF or IB crews? Maybe then BA would see they don't have it QUITE so bad.

Just out of curiousity concorde, what sort of things do you think BA needs to change for it's cabin crew to 'get it's house in order'? Are you suggesting less money for same amount of work? More work for more money? More work for LESS money? Just curious.....

[HZ123]

The thread tells me that once again we at BA are becoming complacent. The attitude that WW can do nothing to me as I am part of the NJC is part correct. Surely we should be asking ourselves how we can change and improve things. As for B2 agreements and the like many of those airlines mentioned as our competitors have made vast inroads into our earnings as have the LC. Why do we at BA always have to go on the defensive and appear militant. Whereas BA & CC individuals may be financially content I doubt our shareholders share the same views or any financial satisfaction.

[keeperboy]

HZ123 I hear what you are saying and definitely agree in part. I am in no way complacent about BA's financial position nor am I particularly militant. I am, however concerned with the 'give give give' stance that BA management seems to take, when it should be more like 'Consultation - then give AND take'. And again I will stress, I am NOT just talking in monetary terms here. There are SO many other areas within Inflight Services that BA can make crews lives a hell of a lot nicer, such as a proper bidding system for longhaul, some mixed flying for short haul and better staff travel concessions for all.

We all know there are areas where BA can be more efficient, whether it be in long or shorthaul and can all make inroads to help make things work better.

BASSA has its good points and bad points, but on the whole it is an effective lobby for cabin crew. Just have a read of the Qantas Cabin Crew forum on the LHR base . Qantas used to have fantastic working conditions and were the envy of the industry. Now they are treated like peasants and are gradually having work taken away from them. And just read what sort of problems, especially in the likes of CRM that it is causing them. A lot of this is due to the ineffectiveness of their union. I don't want to see conditions at BA going down the same path and totally acknowledge that we have to be a bit more flexible and have a bit more of a 'give and take' mentality.

There is however something I will never, ever agree to and would happily strike over......I would never agree to taking a pay cut. I am happy to be more flexible, look at roster patterns etc etc, but a cut in pay, either directly or indirectly (ie by setting up cheap foreign bases a la QF LHR base), no way.

Our competitors, as you mention may have made inroads into our profits. However we are still coming out on top. We are shortly to announce our biggest profit since 1997. And what about our UK competitors? Virgin makes modest profits, but as it is not a public company it can pretty much report what it likes. As for bmi....even with their cheaper than chips cuts, they have only made single digit profits this year after four years of losses. And our competitors across the pond? Well one is bankrupt and the other not far from it.

[DarkStar]

Keeperboy, I note your balanced comments, but I have a few questions and comments. Do you really think a strike would happen?... and if so do CC care that it may bring the Airline either down or cripple it, either way I think the result would be for BA to draw up new contracts for all staff, not just crew which would really hurt everyone. I do see money being thrown at CC but the CAT payments for example are where CC allowances could easily be reigned in. I just wonder what a strike will achieve in the long run, but personally, I think CC will see sense, that, in general the CC are looked after better than most and the thought of a new contract - 'take it or leave it option' will focus many minds.

Just a thought....:)

[concorde001]

Hi Keeperboy,
Can I just ask what the problem is with staff travel concessions? Are they the same as Customer Service Agents at LHR, or do crew get a different package? From what you have said, they don't seem t be very good.....do you have a limit on how many you are allowed?
I think you have a valid point when you suggest BA could provide better benefits to its crew.

[NigelsFriend]

BA staff travel system...

unlimited ID90 after the first year of joining (tand by econemy),
1 ID100 after 7 yrs of service (stand by econemy),
ID100 can be firmed after 10 yrs of service.....

not sure after that :O



I dont think CC will go on strike as we are full aware that would be the end of the company, but you never know....



pp. above staff travel consessions are for CC, FC got a few more

[concorde001]

Are you entitled to any confirmed? For example ID50, but with a confirmed reservation?

[redfred]

Unlimited ID90's on BA after 6 months service
ID00's after 7 and 10 years service
Unlimited ID90's and zed fares on other carriers after 1 years service.

[concorde001]

So no ID50, I mean instead if R2,no R1s? Thats a shame, I know LH and AF employees get R1s.

[redfred]

you get id80, id75, id50 r1's after 6 months

[keeperboy]

Concorde the main issue for cabin crew and concessions is this:

A lot of us are single and have no spouse but instead have a 'nonimated companion' listed on our concessions.

It would be great if we could take our 'travel companion' away on our trips with us. This isn't possible however as a travel companion must be 'accompanied' by the staff member. So even though the staff member is onboard operating the same flight, we can't take our companion with us.

Most other UK airlines such as Virgin and bmi allow you to simply have a number of nominees on your conessions. Could be mum and dad, could be joe bloggs you met down the pub last friday night. They are fixed annually and you can change them once a year. BA's are SO outdated with the old spouse, mum dad bro sister rule.

Darkstar, I agree with you on CAT payments and think it would be great if BA and BASSA could have open forums on how we can all move forward for the common good. For example if CAT payments and the rent and maitenence of the CAT lounge costs BA say £2 million a year, maybe they could say 'OK, we are going to divide £1 and divide it amongst the basic salaries of the short-haul crews. That way, both BA and the crew win. BA saves £1 million and the crew don't lose out entirely. That would be in an ideal world but BA is more likely to take the stance of 'close the CAT lounge, get rid of CAT payments, let the crew lose out and get p*ssed off and save us £2m'.

The threat of strike action always has to be in existence or what is the point of having a union? OK, I don't think anyone would strike over losing a CAT payment, but if BA REALLY decided it was going to take the p*ss and doubled our workload and cut our salaries by 20% I could definitely see a strike happening and being supported by the crew. Of course we would all be hoping that the mere threat of it would be enough to have a reasonable resolution but if not I would be happy to strike. Personally I think BA are a responsible employer and I can't see a scenario like this happening as it would ruin customer, shareholders and lenders confidence in the airline.

Our pay and conditions are much better than a lot of airlines, but still on par or less than the likes of Air France, Iberia, KLM etc. Short-haul crew at Air France get an average of 15 days off per month for example.

I reckon instead we will see yet another 'new contract', the 'even newer' contract with a different allowence system to current.

[HZ123]

I do not think that the company would fear a strike. It is OK for many of the reps to bluster about what might happen, the same is true of ground services reps. The rub is that the majority of staff with less than 10 years have too many outgoings to take such action. There would also be a number of staff that would work as happened last time. On the last ocassion a couple of thousand rang in sick as they did not have the bottle to admit to taken industrial action.
I support our CC in many aspects, they are professional and many are a credit to the company. However, we at BA are still paid in excess of all of our competitors and can only survive with further fiscal cuts. Such cuts must in the main take into account future pay and allowances for all of us at BA, irrespective of whether we like it or not.

[DarkStar]

HZ123 - another insightful comment again! There's a nagging rumour that the whole system of allowances are to be investigated and 'adjusted', but that contracts will not be tackled due legal issues, however, any strike would immediately lead to wholesale contract changes. Did a BOS/LHR last week and many FC/CC seem to think the allowances are increasingly looking like bargaining tools. :hmm:

[keeperboy]

Darkstar how do you mean the allowence system is to be 'investigated and adjusted'? The allowence system CANNOT be changed as it forms part of our contractual agreement with BA. The only way our allowence system can be changed is by changing our contracts which requires BASSA and indirectly our agreement.

I'm sure after the huge failure of the 'Elapsed Hourly Rate' that management tried to bring in late last year, they will try again with a few extra 'sweetners'. I'm certainly not anti towards changing the allowence system as in many ways the current system is unfair. The only thing is, any new system will have to ensure that crews don't see a dip in their monthly take home pay. Remember, the whole objective from BA's position on the Elapsed Hourly Rate was to save money by reduced tax and NI payments BA has to make, not by cutting our pay per se. Yeah right!! :-) Perhaps if management were a bit more communicative with the crew and honest they would have more success.

HZ123 any talk of a strike are really speculative as there isn't even so much of a rumour of one at the moment. We all know that we have to tighten our belts, but are hoping for constructive ways that will benefit both the crews and BA. Saying that, unlike many other airlines,
BA's LHR operation is 100% permanent and mainline . And around 85-90% of these crew are in the BASSA union. Many airlines have crew on temporary/non mainline crews at their various bases, so if the mainline crews do pursue industrial action there are non-unionised/mainline crews to maintain some sort of operation. At LHR this is not the case. Any industrial action by BASSA would see BA's ops at LHR at a near standstill.

It was only a few months ago that we seen the first threat over industrial action in ages. BA refused to budge on our pay rise, insisting that any pay rise would be linked to the new attendance management process. After numerous meetings (A YEARS WORTH!!) BA stood their ground and said they would not budge on the issue. BASSA said enough is enough, and gained permission to hold a ballot on industrial action for all mainline crew. The very next day BA came back to the table and said they would give the pay rise (backdated) without linking it to the Attendance Management Process. Although many of us do have under 10 years of service, we are perhaps MORE likely to defend our conditions than someone who is retiring in five years.

Also HZ we are NOT 'paid in excess of all our competitors'. Compared to bmi, Virgin or the other UK airlines maybe yes, we are (which is the main reason many of us have come from those airlines to BA). Compare our salaries and conditions to our collegues at Air France, Iberia or Swiss. We do indeed hold the title of 'most expensive crew in europe' but much of these figures are diluted by the huge pension problem BA has. Funny enough, Iberia's management also tell their crews they are the most expensive in europe, so would be interesting to know where the truth lays!

[DarkStar]

Keeperboy - good post. Hot rumour is that all hotels where crew nightstop are going to include breakfast, lunch, dinner as part of the deal, i.e there will be 'no need to claim' as meals have been provided :( I think that way its gets around allowance contract issue in some way :}

I don't think a strike will happen, as you so rightly point out, BA management crumble in the face of a strike threat - always have, always will :E

[keeperboy]

Cheeky buggers! :cool:

How would they pay allowences when we AREN'T in a hotel though?

Like short-haul doing a there-and-back or long haul in-flight?

Don't reckon that one's gonna happen some how! And if it does it will be sevruga and champers for dinner in the hotel for me! :-)

[Barprop]

Thank goodness the question Hayley_20 asked was answered by exmax when it was. Just 11 minutes later and it might not have happened as the whole thing was brought to a grinding halt in rather dramatic fashion. Anybody else wish to discuss what they earn or spend? It hardly seems to me that a discussion of it was ever asked for, nor did exmax enter into one.
What's the problem with asking for and being given a guideline figure to allow some expectation of likely future financial flexibility in order to plan domestic arrangements? It seems more than reasonable to me.

There really is no big secret to what anyone, in any position, in any industry earns if you care to look a little. The mere mention of a rough figure really is nothing to get so excited about, especially since the only interested party was Hayley_20 who will eventually come to know the situation anyway but asked so she might plan ahead.
Any others who read such a reply and chose to feel affected by what they see have a number of choices available to them. The fact that they are presented with an approximate and reasonably freely available piece of information that may make them consider those choices changes nothing.

Well done exmax for showing a little support for what 2 years ago would of been a colleague. :ok:

To everyone else, sorry to mention the original post, as you were.

[exmax]

Thanks Barprop:D much appreciated.

I will now be a colleague again, but in a different location/role, but looking forward to returning to BA in a couple of days time.

Exmax

[DarkStar]

Keeperboy - I'm led to believe its the meal allowances which are being targetted, so non-hotac allowances would seem to be safe ...for now. I have to say why should my meal allowances by higher than say, ground staff who travel on duty and stay in the same hotels as me? I think BA will roll out 'all-in hotel/meals' when new hotel contracts are being thrashed out.:hmm:

[Re-Heat]

I don't think a strike will happen, as you so rightly point out, BA management crumble in the face of a strike threat - always have, always will
Like when you all phoned in sick last time then rather than admit you were on strike?

Don't reckon that one's gonna happen some how! And if it does it will be sevruga and champers for dinner in the hotel for me! :-)
You've obviously never been subject to other normal companies' policies on eating out when staying at a hotel. At normal companies you eat according to the policy and get fired or recharged for unauthorised claims like that. Get used to it or your expenses won't be approved!

[keeperboy]

Oh Re-Heat, let me guess, you are a Cabin Crew hater that thinks we are all overpaid underworked whingers that hold the company to ransom and you work in Waterside or on the ground? Or perhaps not for BA at all?

Reality check.....the sevruga and champers was obviously tongue in cheek.

And these days I think you would be in more trouble for calling in sick than going on strike so can't see that one happening again! :p

To be honest, whether striking or mass sick calls, has the same end result, no? Cancellations, disruption.....

[Re-Heat]

Actually I am not a cabin crew hater - I can't however stand no-can-do union attitudes that have nothing to do with safety and everything to do with entrenchment.

[Anti-ice]

zzzzzzzzzz:zzz:

[keeperboy]

Let's face it. In any business, every industry there is a company that pays the best and one that pays the worse and loads in between. This is true whether it is a shop, a bank, an insurance company, restaurant, WHATEVER!

As far as UK airlines go it just happens to be BA. Big deal.

Re-Heat, if you were Cabin Crew for BA you would understand where we are coming from. I don't know the ins and outs of the banking world, but if someone worked for Barclays and had a contract (a 2 way BINDING agreement) stating their terms, conditions and the way they are paid I wouldn't find it my business to question or complain about it. And I guess I would understand and be able to empathise if Barclays then decided they didn't want to abide by that contract anymore.

There are very few of my collegues that I would describe as 'entrentched' as you put it. Most of us don't have our heads in the sand, we know we are on average better paid than our collegues at other airlines and have better conditions. We know there are areas within our department that could be addressed and made more efficient. The large majority of us are also more than happy to discuss various options with our management and trade union to find mutually beneficial outcomes.

What the majority of us will not stand for however is being shafted, as BA has attempted to do in the past. A bit of honesty, discussion and give-and-take is all most of us are asking for.