PDA

View Full Version : bmi Redundancies


fokker
23rd Oct 2001, 12:46
Well, the speculation stops here. 117 pilots to at bmi between January & April 2002. 8 who were already on their way and 109 of us who got the bullet this morning. B*ll*cks!

D'you want fries with that?


You haven't seen me, right? :(

tunturi
23rd Oct 2001, 12:58
fokker
There is nothing useful I can say except GOOD LUCK. I wish you and your colleagues the very best. I may be asking you for the same soon, who knows. Things WILL get better but will take time. I assume you have checked out Easy's recruitment at Easyjet.com :(

Busta Level
23rd Oct 2001, 13:36
Pants. Really sorry to hear that fokker.

I'm still not sure whether I'm in the 117 or not. Sitting on my ar*e waiting to hear.

Was it a phone call or letter? Post has not arrived yet.

What a horrible, horrible day.

Meeb
23rd Oct 2001, 13:36
Very sorry to hear that fokker, hope you get something else soon. Can you give an indication of the breakdown of the job losses? Is it the bmi Fokker fleet which is affected and are bmir cutting back also?
Good Luck for the future to everyone affected.

2S3
23rd Oct 2001, 13:37
fokker
I too have just got my letter but don't give up hope just yet. It seems that a very large number of Captains are applying for some of the 'Options' available which should help us all.
In any event, best of luck, and remember that all who were made redundant last tiime were offered their job back eventually.

BASH D. BISHOP
23rd Oct 2001, 13:42
Fokker

Best of luck. I presume you've now on three months notice? Things can change in three months.

Can anyone give the full breakdown of how many and from which fleet.

15 from bmi regional have started the statutory consultation period. But its hoped that it won't lead to redundancy for all. Avenues being pursued are secondments to other Emb145 operators and wet leases overseas.

The regional winter schedule is pretty much unaffected. We do start operating an embraer on a MAN-DUS and MAN-LHR. I thought the BALPA negotiated Scope clause precluded the latter? :(

Eff Oh
23rd Oct 2001, 13:43
Good luck to you guys..... My thoughts are with you all at this time. I hope you all find something soon.
Good luck.
Eff Oh :(

[ 23 October 2001: Message edited by: Eff Oh ]

fokker
23rd Oct 2001, 13:49
All,

Thankyou sincerely for your expressions of support. They are appreciated. Naturally, my own best wishes go to everyone affected.

BUSTA,

It was a letter, detailing the payoff, date of redundancy and including a list of all those affected.

It has been done on a strictly 'last in, first out' basis and includes A320/1, Fokker and B737. I imagine any losses in bmir will be a separate issue.

It's worth remembering that these are 'worst case' figures and, although we have termination dates, the situation could change significantly between now and then. Small comfort, I know, when you've just opened the post and your hands are still shaking, but who knows...........?


You haven't seen me, right? :(

2S3
23rd Oct 2001, 13:56
Bash D Bishop
Last-in First-out regardless of fleet which gives 19 Fkr, 21 Boeing and the rest are Airbus. For the record, it does seem that those who joined from bmir were moved up the list to reflect when they joined bmir not bmi main, lucky them! :( :( :(

The Zombie
23rd Oct 2001, 13:57
fokker,
Hope you are flying high again very very soon. It's a crazy world we live in these days.

I keep being told that last in first out although custom and practice in aviation is now illegal under european law? It should only be on personal performances.

Does anyone else know more of this?

ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz........

Gaza
23rd Oct 2001, 14:16
I keep being told that last in first out although custom and practice in aviation is now illegal under european law? It should only be on personal performances

The rules governing this are the same for all industries. In deciding the selection criteria for redundancy companies must apply it consistently. Using LIFO is easier than basing it on performance as this could lead to Unfair Dismissal claims.

Good luck to all those affected :rolleyes: . Hopefully things will pick-up and the figures above are worse case. Remember the glass is always half full!

[ 23 October 2001: Message edited by: Gaza ]

coldsore
23rd Oct 2001, 14:52
The very best of luck to you all. EZY still needs pilots-infact we were asked to nominate individuals via some headhunting thing. I think this was conceived before the 11th(perceived shortage) and since then, I'm told, we have had a flood of applications. Still might be a good time to pick up any contacts at EZY.
Sorry if this sound obvious.
GOOD LUCK

fsp2001
23rd Oct 2001, 15:41
Any word on head office casualties?

Scudrunner
23rd Oct 2001, 16:13
Received my letter this morning. Tried to phone any LHR manager and guess what - nobody's answering the 'phone. Why am I not surprised. Anyway does anyone know if this is a final figure or will there be some final adjustment?

"Just like to say we're all counting on you!"

Budvar
23rd Oct 2001, 17:06
Ladies and gents my thoughts go out to everyone today, and hope that things turn around before the dates come up!!!
I'm a little concerned, and this isn't a rant or personal against any involved, about the situation with the people who joined quite recently from commuter. I realise that under employment law when a transfer of business has occurred the employees concerned keep their length of service etc... But usually this is when a takeover has happenned and the workforces are merged,
i.e. pilots being forced on to a new seniority list and thereby being put straight at the botttom even after many years of service. Very unfair!!!!
However this situation is very different, the pilots concerned were not forced to move and did so of their own free will, therefore IMHO should have a start date of when they joined mainline bmi. Correct me if I am wrong (as is often the case) but I believe cadets which are recruited fom inside the company ( the hall,dispatchers etc..) have had none of their previous servce taken into account and have a start date of when they started flying even though they may of been with company a number of years. Should the same happen for commuter pilots ??
Good Luck to All!!!

dv8
23rd Oct 2001, 17:47
fokker truly sorry for you and the other 116. at least you get notice, redundancy pay, etc. more than Gill Airways ever got and a minimum of three months for you to try and find other employment or an improvement in the situation.
Best of luck to you all

thegirth
23rd Oct 2001, 19:04
Good luck to all those in the 109 to go, I'm one of the 8 so hope I've saved someone a job.

Hopefully things will turn around before the redundancy dates arrive, at bmi, my new employer, and everywhere else.

Mr Benn
23rd Oct 2001, 19:05
How long have some of the most senior on the redundancy list been working for bmi? I only ask because I know a few people there who joined in the last couple of years.
Sad day for everyone there.

MaximumPete
23rd Oct 2001, 19:44
Fokker - Can you ring me at home sometime this evening? If you don't have my number try

[email protected]

MP

Max Angle
23rd Oct 2001, 20:21
Mr Benn,

Looking at the latest list (and there have been a few changes) it looks like joiners from around March 2000 onwards are at going to go. Any Captain who joined after around December 1996 is at risk of demotion. The union and the company are going to great lengths to cut the number down with various schemes but it looks grim for a great many people. My job and command are safe for the moment but I can tell you that nobody feels very secure right now.

Whilst not wishing to see anybody out of work who does not need to be I do have some concerns about BMIR guys jumping over mainline guys in respect of last in/first out but people who know far more about it than I have been working hard on the seniority list for a long time now and I guess they have done all they can within the law to protect those who have been in mainline for a while.

The scale of these losses is going to rip the company apart for a bit I think, we have hired a lot of very good people in the last few years and it is such a shame to see so many people on the list that I have enjoyed flying with that are now going to be out.

Sad days for all of us.

actjag
23rd Oct 2001, 21:46
A very sad day, and 109 is a far cry from 85!

Regarding regional, while it may not be very popular, these were the terms agreed between the various parties. Its a bit late now to start making noises, other than to cause a 'them and us' attitude to breed, which achieves nothing.

Unfortuantely for the cadets, if they had signed a contract, effectively waiving their length of service for the company, then they have to accept the consequences of their actions, unless BALPA can sort something out.

You will probably find the LIFO principal is really the only method open to the company. After all, those who have tried to make redundancies on the basis of age, sex and even productivity have all had their fingers badly burned.

Anyway, redundancy is never fair to the person at the receiving end. I've been there once too often already.

Simon Miller
23rd Oct 2001, 22:27
:( To all at BMI that are affected I hope that the day day never arrives when you have to finish, here's to hoping that things will pick-up soon ( for us all, I'm near the bottom of a seniority list aswell ) :( :(

Scottie Dog
23rd Oct 2001, 23:10
Good luck to all at Bmi. Whilst not involved in the flying side of aviation (not by choice), I know how you must be feeling.

I myself have been given advance warning of redundancy from the Corporate travel market after 33 years - nearly 16 with my present employer - and will be unemployed from the end of the year.

It has been a horrendous year - the worst that I have known, and it has affected us all badly.

To those who are feeling down, I wish good cheer. To those who hopefully are down but not out, I wish good hunting.

With any luck things can only start to get brighter as the new year starts.

Scottie Dog
:confused: :confused:

edited for spelling!!
:o

[ 23 October 2001: Message edited by: Scottie Dog ]

Whossat Forrus
24th Oct 2001, 00:24
Sorry to hear the bad news guys. Hang in there tho', things turn around in the blink of an eye these days. It's hard to see any good in all of this, and it's hard to comprehend the scale of damage done to what was our thriving world but we are a resilient lot us aviating types and it's going to get better some day.

Stellina
24th Oct 2001, 00:46
There's no words to say... :confused: :confused:

Budvar
24th Oct 2001, 02:31
actjag, regarding regional, i don't think it's too late to start making noises, certainly not for the individuals who have been 'leapfrogged' and now find themselves facing redundancy.Under employment law 'Transfer of Undertaking' determines an employee's statutory rights regarding payments etc... but it does not determine who will be made redundant.We operate under a last in first out policy as per the AFS, therefore any aggreement made in respect of the pilot concerned is against the AFS and therefore BIG noises should be made!(noises were not made earlier as this has only come into light in the present situation).
Again this is not personal nor is it fuel for a 'them and us' argument, but I feel that colleagues have been dealt an injustice.
Good luck to all!!

zbalata
24th Oct 2001, 02:35
Fokker and all others involved whom I dont know, best wishes and good luck to you all.

Many close friends flying received letters today, and others at the Hall have meetings tomorrow and during the rest of the week to discuss their futures.

Hope by January everything has turned round and all are employed again, GOOD LUCK ALL>

Agamemnon
24th Oct 2001, 02:59
Budvar - a well argued point. The implications should have been spotted earlier. I hope it's not too late for those who have given Midland many loyal years to speak up.

moleslayer
24th Oct 2001, 03:16
I believe the precedent was set when 'London City Airways'(LCA)was integrated into the then 'British Midland Airways'(BMA).

When the 'Gulf War' broke out,the LCA guys were kept on,whilst those above them on the seniority list were laid-off.

However,it would seem that the individuals concerned in the current dispute, left 'Commuter'or 'Regional'of their own free will,and therefore should be treated the same as any other pilot joining from another company.On the other hand ,maybe they just transferred from one'department'to another.....I'm confused :confused: :confused:

BASH D. BISHOP
24th Oct 2001, 13:17
As a bmir pilot, I fly bmi scheduled routes, in bmi owned and liveried aircraft, wearing a bmi uniform, with bmi cabin attendants and at the end of the month I get a payslip from the Hall telling me how much(?) bmi have paid me.

When said individuals transferred to LHR, they simply changed from one department to another. In the same way as an airbus pilot at LHR might apply for and transfer to the A330 at MAN.

It would be difficult to convince an Employment Tribunal that regional pilots previous employment by bmi should be ignored, when determining a fair and equitable redundancy policy. But I expect some of you will try to create a stink anyway. When the Cadets come back they will join bmir on the 145. Which seniority list will they join? Finally, take a look at it from the management perspective. Who are you going to make redundant an experienced Captain from the 145 or SAAB, or some callow, senecca driving wiener? :rolleyes:

moleslayer
24th Oct 2001, 13:42
Well argued BD.B.....

I think that just about wraps the subject up once and for all.This is obviously the line the Management have decided upon,and I imagine it unlikely they did it that way without taking prior legal advice.Or dare I say it,BALPA approval.

A difficult time for all of us involved in this sorry mess.Best make the best of what we've got,3 months to find some income for those with big commitments,or a long holiday for those with a more frugal lifestyle. :( or :)

Eff Oh
24th Oct 2001, 14:44
I am ex BMC (a year ago) and I think that BASH D BISHOP is spot on! I dont see how you could say it is fair to get rid of guys who have worked for the company for SEVERAL years, just because they changed fleet! Thats effectively what it is ..... a fleet change! These guys were not welcomed by BMI with open arms...NO. If they were deemed worthy, they had apply for it, sit a simulator assessment and an interview!!!!!

When I joined I did not work for Business Air, I worked for British Midland Commuter. As mentioned, I was payed by BM I had a BM IATA card, a BM uniform, BM staff travel etc etc. #

You say that they wern't forced to join BM, well at interview it was EXPECTED that we would go Saab, 145, A320/B737. It was called career progression. I think it is quite frankly disgusting, that some people choose to say that one person should be made redundent over another!! :mad: In these times we should all be pulling together to help those who have been unfortunate enough to be made redundent.

Its the same old CRAP between BMI/BMIR, and one of the reasons why I left! The superior way that BMI crews used to speak to and about BMC crews was appaling! I have to say that MOST people were very nice, but a select few certainly made a frosty atmosphere! BM is a good company with some good people, but you have to put all this rubbish aside. It will not make things better for those poor guys. Why pick on guys who's only "crime" was to come from another part of the company seeking career progression?! :(

I sincerely hope that things turn around and that everyone gets their job back. As I said in an earlier post....My thoughts are with you, good luck.

Eff Oh.

[ 24 October 2001: Message edited by: Eff Oh ]

calltheball
24th Oct 2001, 16:25
Bash D Bishop. A well reasoned argument that I can respect, right up until the last paragraph...
Despite my relative inexperience within the company, I don't actually remember the part of my redundancy letter in which the management describe me as a callow senec(c)a driving weiner
I presume therefore that this is the high regard in which you hold your collegues?(We are collegues right?-that being the main thrust of your argument?)
In my short time within bmi I have never encountered any 'us and them' mentality with bmir- although if it does exist it's almost certainly on both sides..
More than that, Don't forget the guys at Oxford that were due to join bmi shortly and now face an uncertain future, each has demonstrated commitment to the company and to their chosen profession with every exam or flight test they have taken. I know some of them personally, and the attitude that they are somehow less important than an experienced Saab/Embraer driver is sad to hear from a collegue.
Less experienced yes, less useful (at the moment) to the company maybe...but not worthy of your dismissal as callow seneca driving weiners....
These people were amongst the first to suffer because of recent events, along with all those who were due to start the courses and didn't. Perhaps you could spare them a thought whilst you are wearing your bmi uniform and flying bmi services?
God forbid if the boot was ever on the other foot I seriously doubt any of these (callow)people would be making flippant comments like yours.
As a parting aside, I have loved every second of my time here, and look forward to the upturn that must (surely?) come and the chance to have a bright outlook on the future again.
Sorry for the rant.
calltheball

Stu M.
24th Oct 2001, 19:07
I think you will find that the answer to the bmir pilots lies in the terms of the agreement under which they were transferred. I have to admit I thought the agreement that their date of joining would remain the same would be ignored but it has been honoured so I have great respect for whoever made that decision. I am really sorry for those who are losing out. When the transfer scheme was started it seemed a very positive step in creating a complete career progression within the bmi group. It's nobody's fault that events have overtaken it, hopefully temporarily.

actjag
24th Oct 2001, 21:42
Budvar,

Considering this was one of the sticky points regarding the transfer agreement, I assumed this was well known between everyone. Obviously not.

Maybe I am being naive, but I would have thought, that someone who has been contributing to the group for around four years should be considered as being more loyal to the group, then someone who has been in the group for 19 months. After all, we all get paid from the same pot of money and are managed by the same people at the top.

The real injustice has been the mis-management that put the group in this position in the first place. If certain quarters within the group had stopped throwing money away, then this whole sorry mess need not have happened. Those responsible should be taking the fall, not us at the sharp end.

The Prisoner
24th Oct 2001, 21:45
Yawn, and yawn again,....im alright jack, ha ha...VAA>? ba.ORPORATE...

fokker
24th Oct 2001, 21:55
Prisoner,

I assume you're either drunk or on drugs; you are certainly a c*nt, either way.

Eff Oh,

Hoist by your own petard, methinks. The fact that you had to sit an interview, sim. assessment etc. only underlines the fact that you were joining a DIFFERENT company. If not, can I please have my joining date back-dated to 10th November 1976....my first job after leaving school, and just about as relevant.

You haven't seen me, right? :mad:

Pilot Pete
24th Oct 2001, 22:06
actjag

just to put the other side of the argument; I'm sure there are people in all companies who have only been there 19 months but who show considerably more loyalty and commitment than some who have been in four years and longer. Just taking the pay cheque for longer is not an indication of loyalty. How about showing as much flexibility as possible in these difficult times? Accepting rostering changes (where they are operational necessities) and the like without complaining, doing all that we as individuals can do to cut costs etc etc. We all know of 'colleagues' who have been in longer who are less willing to do this. Does that make them more loyal? Just a thought, as I personally can't see a fairer method than LIFO that would be simple enough to arrive at.

PP

Busta Level
24th Oct 2001, 23:15
Hate to say it peeps, but we've deviated (!)from the main issue - those out of work. Arguing about bmir vs. bmi etc etc just helps to foster hatred where it does not exist (apart from a few sad idiots from BOTH sides of the fence-or is it the same side?!)

Get a life and start to consider how we can help those out of work rather than resort to the usual PPrune method of pointless arguments.

A pilot is a pilot, at the end of the day, no matter what they fly or who they work for. We are all human, and we are all suffering in one way or another at the moment. We all have families, mortgages, or other commitments, and the VAST majority of us would not wish redundancy and the horrors it brings on anybody. Just hold back on typing hurtful and inflammatory comments here, and spend the time imagining how it feels to be out of work at the start of a downturn...

I'm VERY lucky to have missed the 'bullet' (for now), but it was that close that it puts everything in perspective. If you are so twisted that you feel the world has a vendetta against you, then please end it all now, and get another job. We don't need internal arguments and hatred stirring, we need co-operation and understanding.

There but for the grace of god go I.

Just remember that.

Slotdesk
24th Oct 2001, 23:31
It ain't pretty for us on the ground either..although BMIR seem to be getting away scot-free..(pardon the pun ) compared to us !! :( :(

2S3
24th Oct 2001, 23:32
Lets just clear up a few facts in the bmi/bmir debate:
1. Although both groups may be administered by the same team they are still different companies in their own right (otherwise why would they have different names?)
2. The seniority list for bmi in LHR makes no mention of anyone in bmir, in fact I am led to believe that they have their own list.
3. I know that there are people who joined bmir after some who joined bmi main and yet have not been sent 'the letter', so further proving a difference in companies!
4. When those who came from bmir joined bmi they were given a seniority number and placed on a list reflecting the day they started at bmi main.
5. Until 3 weeks ago the above mentioned list made no reference to a bmir joining date.
6. (And finally!) It states nowhere in the AFS or my contract that people joining from bmir, or any other company for that matter, can jump up the list!
Sorry for the rant and, yes it may sound like sour grapes, but it could mean the difference between having and not having a job! Surely we have an agreement to ensure situations like this don't arise and I can't think of a better or more straight forward system than LIFO!
:confused: :confused: :confused:

Cripple
24th Oct 2001, 23:37
IMHO, Several things need to be pointed out since everyone is getting so agitated.

BUDVAR is trying to point out that if LIFO is being implemented, it should be done as fairly as possible. He has clearly stated that he is not trying to start a ‘them vs us’ argument or suggest that some individuals should be made redundant over others. The situation as to whether or not bmi and bmir are the same company is the point in question. Moleslayer has mentioned that the precedent was set when LCA was integrated into BMA, which is not what has happened with bmi and bmir/BMC.

EFF-OH says that bmir pilots had to apply for a job, then sit an interview and pass a sim check in order to “change fleets”. This sounds rather like the process all other applicants to bmi had to go through to get the job. Hardly a simple fleet change. Should the bmir pilots then be treated like all the other people who went through the same process, regardless of background?

If bmi and bmir are the same company, then why haven’t the two seniority lists been merged, as would be the case if there had been a takeover. Surely according to EFF-OH and BASH.D.BISHOP, the bmir SAAB/EMB pilots should only be made redundant after those with less service in mainline have gone. Not very fair in my opinion. Also, why do the two companies have separate HQ’s if they are indeed one business. There are many other points that I am sure could be found if necessary, and I don’t think that a BRAL pilot joining BA would be able claim his/her BRAL start date in similar circumstances.

In general, any redundancies are VERY unfortunate and distressing for those affected (I am not too far off the bottom myself) but BUDVAR has a point that must be addressed to ensure that the redundancies are dealt with fairly. I know many of those affected (both ex bmir and not) and have no desire to see anyone have to face redundancy. Lets hope things turn around sooner rather than later. All the best to anyone affected by the present climate.

Cripple

PS BASH.D.BISHOP – You mentioned that the cadets that do get taken on in future will be going to bmir on the 145. I feel very sorry for them if they end up flying with a narrow minded individual such as yourself. Obviously, you are such an ace that you have been on jets since day one and were born with vast amounts of airmanship and experience. Everyone has to start somewhere and describing cadets as “Seneca driving wieners” (spelt correctly, of course!) is pathetic. I have never found there to be a rift between bmi and bmir crews, but you seem hell bent on creating one. :mad:

PPS Will bmir 145s really be operating MAN-LHR route? Maybe a separate thread is required to discuss that one re SCOPE etc.

Cripple
25th Oct 2001, 00:01
So much for offline editing. A few of you beat me to it. :p

2S3 has a point. Whilst not starting a bmi vs bmir argument, this needs to be sorted ASAP as it hasn't been mentioned until 3 weeks ago and we are talking about peoples lives, however they are affected. LIFO is the only fair system but it has to be applied on a level playing field.

Methinks we're all too close for comfort :eek:

thewwIIace
25th Oct 2001, 01:32
same thing happening at BA/CFE for doj into seniority. it works both ways, if continued seniority etc, then take it from both lists, 118 from bottom - full stop!!

Budvar
25th Oct 2001, 02:08
Ladies and Gents ( and Bash the Bishop, obviously been bashing that bishop a bit too much lately its clouded your thinking judging by your comments in reference to cadets.) I will reitterate that this not a question of BMI/BMIR, it is a question of pilots which are going to made redundant due to a method which is against our AFS.
This is also not a argument against those pilots concerned or a way of instilling hatred between the groups of pilots from the two companies.
That is what we have at the end of the day two separate companies with a group of pilots which have left on to join the other!
If the boot was on the other foot
i.e> I left bmi and joined bmir (of my own free will!!) and then 2 months later 50 redundancies were announced. However because I'd done 4 years in mailine I've leapt 100 in the seniorty and escaped the chop with 10 others from mainline forcing bmir guys out who've done 3 years with bmir. Would you be happy I THINK NOT!!! You take chances when ever you move from one company to another!!
THAT IS THE ISSUE!!! :(

Captain Speeking
25th Oct 2001, 11:12
Cripple

To answer your question:
"PPS Will bmir 145s really be operating MAN-LHR route? Maybe a separate thread is required to discuss that one re SCOPE etc."

No - it will be changed (along with some other changes) before the final issue. The one you find in your pigeon hole is not the final one!

Eff Oh
25th Oct 2001, 16:32
Fokker......No I didnt go for the interview as I dont work for BMI! The way that some of my friends were treated at interview was appaling! (Interview for the transfer that is!) However I think the person resonsible for that has been "relieved of his position."

Thanks all for your comments, all taken on board. However I do think that there is no easy way to sort this out. Lets face it this nonsense is not going to help!
Eff Oh

PaulDeGearup
25th Oct 2001, 22:16
May I give you the definitive word on the matter; the BMIR pilots who applied for, interviewed and simmed for, posts with bmi mainline were, on joining bmi mainline issued with a letter of appointment.

Amongst other items that letter of appointment may say something along the lines of " your previous employment with BMIR shall count as continuous employment and all other terms are in accordance with the AFS".

What that means is simple; the bmi AFS probably insists that all pilots join the seniority list at the bottom, regardless of whether they enter as a DE Captain, DFO, or F/O. That gives them a seniority date for promotion etc as a pilot. As an employee,however, certain broader terms apply; one of those is that they have given X yrs continuous service to the entire group of companies and thus, when redundancy is considered, this must also be taken into account. Who pays them or has paid is irrelevant so long as the company they worked for was owned and controlled by the same people who own and control the company they now work for.

Hence, those who had X yrs with BMIR and transferred have employee rights in law which over ride the AFS seniority list.

[ 25 October 2001: Message edited by: PaulDeGearup ]

Rob Brown
26th Oct 2001, 02:09
I'm rather new to this forum business and I'm only browsing over this because as I'm not far from the bottom of the list I am trying to find a job...

3 days ago I received notice that due to some rag head I will be evicted from my dream job in 3 months time.

As an ex-cadet I find it quite unpleasant to be described as an ex Callow, seneca Driving Wiener! Its difficult enough hunting for a job with 500 jet hrs, let alone none. It was hard enough trying to pass those exams knowing you had a job waiting, imagine what it is like being in their shoes now. Shelfstacking is probably about as good as their prospects get.

I would be interested to discover Bash's background, do I detect some jeolousy about previous Cadets going main line? I hope one day that one of those aforementioned puddle jumper drivers will be your skipper at bmi, and makes you eat those words..

Perhaps you were not good enough to be a cadet, mmm interesting!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

JT8
26th Oct 2001, 03:54
Bumps,

'Rag head'? :mad: :mad: :mad:
All I can say is tough sh*t about your dreamjob. Your not the only one effected.

WA**ER!


Best of luck to those effected at bmi.

[ 25 October 2001: Message edited by: JT8 ]

Arkroyal
26th Oct 2001, 04:15
Budvar,

You speak utter sense. Employment law requires that the bmi group retain the magnificent 7 who previously worked for bmi regional.

It does not say, however, that they must be retained as bmi mainline pilots. The fairest thing would be, IMHO, to return them to bmir, thus displacing 7 from the bottom of THAT seniority list.

Again, nothing personal, just a quest for fairness in troubled times.

I would ask all in this debate to be objective, and refrain from inflamatory, childish (and racist) remarks.

fast cruiser
26th Oct 2001, 12:08
totally agree with arkroyal

IF they have to remain within the bmi group then they should be sent back to bmir and let 7 MORE SENIOR MAINLINE pilots retain there jobs.

Gaza
26th Oct 2001, 12:39
Unless you are an expert in Employment law and TUPE (Transfer, Undertakings and Protection of Empoyment) regs, it is difficult to say who is right and who is wrong. In this case there is probably a "Moral" right and a "Legal" right. I would imagine that bmi have taken legal advice and used that advice in decideding the selection criteria.

While waiting in the lounge at LHR last night for the 18:40 to EDI (which incidently was full and then switched from A320 to A321)I read in the Evening Standard that bmi and BALPA had agree a "job share" scheme to reduce redundancies. Any more word on this?

thewwIIace
26th Oct 2001, 12:48
on the news it said 50% pay and 50% work would compensate no job losses

moleslayer
26th Oct 2001, 13:08
Re....."job-share" quote in Evening Standard.This was first reported in yesterdays Telegraph.

I imagine a journo'has got hold of(or been leaked)the BALPA company re-organisation document.

I doubt very much that the company intend to'impose'these measures.

But you never know :eek: ;)

Gaza
26th Oct 2001, 15:37
Moleslayer

Article from Evening Standard

Pilots go part-time in bid to save jobs


PILOTS at Britain's second largest airline, BMI, are being asked to halve their hours and pay in a bid to save jobs in the wake of the crisis hitting the airline industry. The work-share arrangement was secured by the pilots' union, the British Air Line Pilots Association said.

The airline industry is reeling from the global economic slowdown exacerbated by the 11 September hijacked plane attacks on the US. Passenger traffic has slumped, forcing airlines to slash thousands of jobs, ground aircraft, cut routes and seek delays in new aircraft orders in an attempt to remain in the skies.

Christopher Darke, the general secretary of Balpa, said BMI agreed that the job-sharing scheme would limit pilot cutbacks. BMI had announced it would slash 109 pilots, one fifth of its pilot workforce, part of a move to cut 600 jobs from its 5,500-strong workforce.

'Under the part-time working scheme, for every two pilots that opt for reduced hours, one more job is saved,' said Darke. 'When good times return to the industry, it will also be easier for BMI to expand by asking pilots to switch back from part-time to full-time working.'

Associated Newspapers Ltd., 24 October 2001


My reading of the article is that bmi are looking for volunteers and not to impose this.

I suppose for some who may be at the end of their careers going part-time may be of interest, assuming pension rights and other benefits remained intact.

[ Edited to include article]

[ 26 October 2001: Message edited by: Gaza ]

Capt Chambo
26th Oct 2001, 20:24
The article also appeared in yesterdays FT. http://tm0.com/sbct.cgi?s=96183290&i=410244&d=1935920

The article needs to be read carefully otherwise the fare paying public might be lead to believe that bmi Pilots are earning 180,000 pa!

PaulDeGearup
26th Oct 2001, 21:08
Why not start by making redundant those who had a retirement date on their 55th birthday but elected to stay to 60. Surely they can be eased out first before the newbies at the bottom ?

But always look on the bright side; if any company can totally f**k anything up, bmi will f**k it up and leave the door wide open for the troops to take legal action for breach of contract,unfair dismissal etc.

And bear in mind, they never win in court :) :) :) :cool:

Batfink
26th Oct 2001, 21:13
Interesting idea Arkroyal.

Unfortunately we don't want them back. :eek: :eek: They have moved onto bigger and better things :D and have about as much relevance back in bmir as you do in the navy! :o :o

Why should they come back to us and displace 8 hard working people from our list when they are bmi mainline contracted!? :mad: :mad: :mad:

le loup garou
26th Oct 2001, 22:03
Does anyone know what the response from the workers as far as 50%, or voluntary retirements is?

actjag
26th Oct 2001, 22:57
Arkroyal,

Good point, which does make a lot of sense. Of course it would all depend on what their contract stipulates.

Here's an idea. What about having a group seniority list, for the purpose of redundancies? Everyone is added as per their date of joining the group, and if the axe starts to swing, those at the bottom get 'chopped'.

Thoughts anyone?

le loup garou
26th Oct 2001, 23:12
Actjag, Forgive me if I am wrong but doesn,t the fact that the guys from bmir that have jumped up the bmi seniority list with regards to the redundancies already suggest that this is already in force to some degree.

This does not mean that I am complaining about recent events, its every man/woman for themselves. Good luck to them.

BASH D. BISHOP
26th Oct 2001, 23:45
Golly, I do seem to have rattled some cots!

My original message on this thread was to offer my sympathy and wish good luck to those made redundant. However, I felt I had to support the magnificent seven(?) and explain why they had not been made redundant at this time. Pauldegearup has explained it much better than I could. (understandable given his position).

We all started on senecas or the equivalent and I didn't mean to make anyone cry, when I highlighted the recent cadets relative experience levels in the group. While success in winning a cadetship is something to be very proud of, you boys and girls really must learn to control your egos.

I understand that you want to explore every avenue to safeguard your jobs, but we are talking about seven(?) people out of one hundred and nine. It may be better to take it on the chin than go out fighting and make a dubious name for yourself. When the time comes for recruitment,you may be remembered for the wrong reasons. Moreover, many of you may find that the offer of re-employment will come from bmir. :eek:

Perhaps we can share a friendly beer on my next LHR nightstop? ;)

STAN DEASY
27th Oct 2001, 02:28
Regarding bmir pilts transferring to bmi being merely a 'change of fleet'.

Were I to transfer from another base to LHR I would under the bmi AFS be entitled to a relocation package.

It is my understanding that such a package was denied to those transfering from bmir as bmi said they were NEW JOINERS.

The company is playing a clever game here. Sadly the losers are the bmir guys who are being villified by some mainline guys whilst being shafted in the wallet by the company.

PaulDeGearup
27th Oct 2001, 15:14
How about taking another look at the problem from a slightly different perspective ?

Most pilots will work 20 days in each 28 day period;that's 20 x 13 periods in a year = 260 days. If you then add in recurrent training and leave you probably reduce that by 5 days for recurrent and 28 for leave, so each person works 260 - 33= 227 days per year. Which is roughly 33 wks per 52.

If the company has 600 pilots the total work available is 600 x 33 wks = 19800 wks per year.If you need to shed 117 pilots that leaves 483 to do the work; which means each person now has to do 40 weeks per year.

If every pilot took the equivalent of 7 weeks unpaid leave spread out over the year,( that would work out at about 4 days unpaid in every 28 ) or took a pay cut of about 20 % you could keep everyone in a job, keep them current and the capacity to expand the network instantly when times get better !

Is something along those lines worth considering ?

Arkroyal
27th Oct 2001, 15:35
Batfink


Not surprised that you 'don't want them back'. However, that would be the fairest option UMHO.

Stan deasy makes a good point that the company are indeed using both sides of the argument to its own advantage, BTW I have not spotted any 'villification' of the 7 from mainline pilots. Budvar and others are being most polite. This is not a personal attack, merely an attempt to discuss the problem and come up with the fairest solution.

Paul de gear. Quite. an across the board short time working of, say, 80% would tide the company over in the short term, save jobs, and keep all but the 'I'm all right Jacks' happy.

Now, Batfink, you've given me an idea! If I can just persuade the company to recognise my time in the navy I should be able to progress my seniority into single figures. To me that's about as sensible as joining a new company and leapfrogging the peeps already there

:eek: :eek: :D

straight&level
27th Oct 2001, 16:48
PaulDeGearup
Great idea-sounds very like the proposed 80% scheme proposed to the company-unfortunately they havn't given that as one of the accepted options yet

Max Continuous
27th Oct 2001, 17:17
PaulDeGearup,

A nice idea, but it wouldn't work in practice because of a problem with human psychology. It's akin to asking people in the street whether they'd be prepared to pay more income tax in return for a better health service. Most say "Oh yes, most definitely" but when it comes to the secrecy of the ballot box a very different result emerges, as political parties will attest to.

Nobody's going to appear mean and selfish publicly when their colleagues are being made redundant, especially as the plan appears fair to everybody, but if implemented there's little doubt it would cause a great deal of secret, unadmitted resentment across vast swathes of the company. All at a time when you need everyone giving as much extra effort and flexibility as possible.

STAN DEASY
27th Oct 2001, 17:50
Cant help but think that we are starting to air our dirty laundry in an inapprpriate forum.

Should this topic not be transferred to our own little piece of heaven or at least lets continue there. After all this is the most action the site has seen in years!!

MaximumPete
27th Oct 2001, 18:52
My sympathies are with all you guys out there, both bmi and bmir, who have received the letter.

I'm looking at the Voluntary Early Retirement (ER) scheme and hope to make a decision when the necessary info has been supplied by the company for me to pass on to the pension people.

Hopefully that will save at least one job.

Good luck guys

MP

calltheball
27th Oct 2001, 19:19
Bash,
You are a card.....I could laugh all the way to the unemployment office...
I'm not one to refuse beer from anyone Bash so I look forward to it on your next LHR N/stop. Sadly, beer will probably be about 300 a pint by then (expensive even by London standards)...
For my two pence worth, if the 7 guys were taken on in mainline were led to believe it was a job transfer then thats it..no argument -they should be kept on.
If it wasn't under this system, and the job was applied for like any external candidate (ie interview/sim ride) then the question needs to be asked in the future where do people in a similar situation stand?
The transferral system needs to be formalised to make the position transparent to all parties. That way issues like this shouldn't reoccur.
Finally, let me re-iterate once more, this is a thought for the future -not something that should be applied retrospectively.
Best of luck to all affected...

-Goes back to cot to polish ego...........

PaulDeGearup
28th Oct 2001, 19:50
Pauldegearup has explained it much better than I could. (understandable given his position).

Bash me old, do I know you ?

More importantly, do you know me ?
Do you take the Mail On Sunday ?
From the end of Nov it will make extremely fun reading !

Stagnation Point
28th Oct 2001, 22:25
I believe the way from bmir to bmi is by way of a tranfer , it is certain advertised that way in bmi. The interview is called a transfer interview, and the sim ride is the same for all that join bmi. The sad thing is that the transfer agreement only goes one way, we can join you but you can't join us.

When I was interviewed for bmir or Bizzy Air, as it was then, I was told that if I transferred to mainline then the start date with Biz Air would continue to be my seniority date. I believe there is a law which covers this situation but check that one out with yur own bush lawyer.

As far as villification of the seven go, it will only be from those narrow minded enough to think that like that and its unfortunate because it distances the two working groups of pilots. Wouldn't it be more advantageous if we all worked together like friends rather than exersise some moronic form of sibling rivalry.

Capt Homesick
29th Oct 2001, 22:31
And there are some bmir jet pilots who've never done any jet assessment at all!

BmPilot21
29th Oct 2001, 23:18
If the 7 BMIR guys/girls have their BMIR date as their joining date, then anyone who joined BMIR after I joined bmi should be made reundant BEFORE ME!

You can't have it going one way only.

pjumbo
29th Oct 2001, 23:22
I feel for all you guys (and gals) who are having to leave the Company. I am in a similar situation but not with BMI.

Having seen the mention of LIFO and how it is being applied within your Company, I would like to ask the following question.

Background......My Company joining date does not coincide with my relative position on the pilot seniority list because I transferred within the Company from another job. I've been with the Company for nearly 6 years but only on the pilot seniority list for 20 months. Unfortunately, this places me below the 'cut-off' line when considering only the pilot seniority list and not literally LIFO.

My question is(finally!)....How should someone in those circumstances be treated when redundancies are being considered? (Both with and without the European Law consideration.)

Sorry it was so long!....thanks for your help..........pjumbo :rolleyes:

Bash
30th Oct 2001, 01:21
pjumbo

I think the matter of transfers from bmir rests with the terms of the transfer agreement signed by the management of both companies and the contract of employment of the people in question. That is why this arguement is a bit pointless. Everyone's entitled to an emotional opinion but it's the legal opinion that counts.

skyscraper
30th Oct 2001, 02:46
The unlucky ones at Toad Hall are being told by individual meeting with management whether they still have a job or not. On the surface this would seem a slightly less painful way than the usual 'letter in the post' scenario. However when you have been waiting almost a week for your 'chat', then a letter puts you out of(or in!) your misery a lot quicker. The process is kinder in theory but waiting your turn is torture when all you want to know is, do I have a job or not?

Vortillion
30th Oct 2001, 10:31
BMPilot21 - You do have a point. I heard that Virgin originally planned to make its Classic drivers redundant when they parked the fleet. As the most senior pilots, they successfully argued that they should be type converted onto the airbus at the expense of current but less senior airbus crews.

Its not quite the same with us as we have two separate AOCs and two separate seniority lists. If you have nothing to lose try it!
Of course the logical consequence is that you may end up flying a 145 out of ABZ. Is that what you want??

Good luck anyway.

Arkroyal
30th Oct 2001, 15:16
Bmpilot21,

You have avery good point there. The rule would appear to be very much a one way street.

Vortillion. You say 'Its not quite the same with us as we have two separate AOCs and two separate seniority lists'. Quite. In fact two separate companies.

Now let me see, 145 out of ABZ, or flipping burgers. Might take a while to make up my mind :confused:

Bash
30th Oct 2001, 17:28
Several people have tried to explain this but it's not getting through is it? I'll have one last try.

It is a one way street. Up until recently that was exactly how bmi pilots wanted it. To open it up two way would have meant giving up some of the protection the current agreement gives them.

There are two companies, bmi and bmir. They both have their own AOC, contracts of employment, crew councils and AFS or Memorandum of Agreement with the respective crew organisations.

Under a written agreement between the two companies some pilots have transferred from bmir to bmi. To do so they had to meet several criteria and could only transfer according to the restrictions in that agreement. At the time the agreement was considered to be very protective of bmi pilots and rightly so. When pilots transferred they left the employment of bmir and signed contracts with bmi.

When they changed company they also changed representative body from the independant bmir crew council to the bmi BALPA council and from the bmir MoA to the bmi AFS.

However, there is a clause in the agreement under which they transferred which stipulates that for the purposes of redundancy and various other purposes their date of joining bmi would be the same as their date of joining bmir or it's predecessor. I don't know for sure but my guess is it's in their contract also.

That's the whole point that some people have not grasped. These pilots have a contract of employment with bmi. No one at bmi, including the tranferees, has a contract of employment or any other agreement, with bmir. Until a few weeks ago no-one would have wanted one.

As I said earlier there is no transfer agreement from bmi to bmir and no-one has ever wanted one. If the bmi BALPA Council tried to negotiate one no doubt it would be agreed with exactly the same terms as the bmir to bmi one. First Officer entry only, bottom of the seniority list, lowest base bid priority, simulator check and interview and only when bmi can afford to lose them and bmir have a need. Of course they would be entitled to expect their date of joining bmir for redundancy purposes to be the date they joined bmi. The alternative would be a truly open doorway between the two. Captains transferring etc etc.

Six months ago that would have been laughed out of sight by bmi pilots. When the dust settles perhaps BALPA should approach bmi and bmir to see if they can reach such an agreement. Right now bmir don't have any vacancies but who knows in the future? It might be a lot more useful than a pointless scope agreement that simply reduces bmi's room to manouvre and in the long term puts more jobs at risk.

"Redundancy? Don't be stupid there's a worldwide pilot shortage!"

For the seven it's a good job somebody had a little bit of foresight. Perhaps the man in ABZ is a bit smarter than folk think.

My opinion? The current agreement is good. It protects bmi senior pilots and it gives those transferring an incentive. They are quite happy to go to the bottom for promotion etc and work their way up but I think they deserve to be rewarded for length of service to the group. If that clause was not there no-one would transfer and a few months ago there was a need for them to go and a career structure was considered vital. It's only my opinion and I understand how those who have been unlucky feel but no-one meant for you to suffer. If someone told you life is fair they were lying. I'm sorry.

[ 30 October 2001: Message edited by: Bash ]

Rommel
30th Oct 2001, 17:43
I remember in 1990,whilst then I was at Midland as junior jet FO,being balloted along with all the other pilots:-

1) Across the board pay cut of 4%
or
2) 30 lay offs from the bottom.

Result?
A clear vote for the lay offs,I kept my job,but I was shocked at the result and attitude by the "Im alright jack' contingent,4% was a small price to pay.

Midland re hired most of the unfortunates,many cadets amongst them,only to lay them off AGAIN the following winter,needless to say,being at the drafty end of any list is not comfortable,many went elsewhere to major carriers at the first chance.
Life at Midland hasnt changed

anoxic
30th Oct 2001, 19:59
Bash

Until a few weeks ago no-one would have wanted one. (bmi transfer to bmir).

Not true. I know of one pilot who has been trying for nearly two years to get to bmir and has lots of correspondence, some promises, but no deal at all. His circumstances are personal - desperate to change base - but he can't manage it. In fact, he was told that his service with bmi wouldn't count!......

[ 30 October 2001: Message edited by: Anoxic ]

Agamemnon
30th Oct 2001, 20:48
I recon there are at least eight ex Business Air/Commuter pilots who have joined bmi, not seven.

Bash
30th Oct 2001, 21:10
Anoxic

Missed the point again. Your chum wanted to transfer to bmir, presumably with his command or seniority, with his choice of base,and probably his salary and pension. What he would have not have wanted is a reciprocal agreement. First Officers only, year one salary, bottom of the seniority list, bottom of the base bids etc. He would have gone to ABZ for at least a year before he got to his choice of base. However, his service with bmi would have kept him off the redundancy list now. Actually I think there were several bmi pilots who would have liked to transfer but not on those terms. If bmi pilots want an agreement to transfer they should ask their BALPA council to negotiate it. Whatever they ask for, the bmir crew council will demand exactly the same for their members from bmi.

The point I was answering is why can bmi pilots not take the jobs of bmir pilots instead of being made redundant.

[ 30 October 2001: Message edited by: Bash ]

Bash
30th Oct 2001, 21:17
There were seven who joined last spring. Prior to that I can think of five others who went previously.

Agamemnon
30th Oct 2001, 23:28
So would one of the seven/eight/twelve ex-commuter people care to post verbatim the relevant section of their contract so we can see exactly what was, and was not, agreed in writing when they joined bmi.
At least it should stop the bickering. It probably won't do much for the bad taste still lingering, though.

Bash
31st Oct 2001, 00:48
I don't have a contract but I can quote from the agreement signed by the Director of Operations of both companies.

"On transferring to British Midland a British Midland Commuter pilot's employment start date will transfer with them as their start date with British Midland."

I know all seven. They did not write the agreement. They have a legal and moral right to be where they are. Persecuting them will not help those who have lost their jobs. Doing our jobs and helping get bmi back on track might do.

[ 30 October 2001: Message edited by: Bash ]

anoxic
31st Oct 2001, 21:15
Bash
No, I didn't "miss the point". I understand where you're coming from but I wished to point out that this "transfer" is one-sided. My chum wanted to transfer to bmir with his command , yes, because at the time bmir were very short of experience and desperately needed captains (oh joyous days) - but definitely not with his salary and pension - just his joining date. Not possible.

My point is his service with bmi would not have kept him off the bmir redundancy list now.

[ 31 October 2001: Message edited by: Anoxic ]

MaximumPete
31st Oct 2001, 21:21
Looks a bit one-sided to me! ;)

le loup garou
31st Oct 2001, 21:48
Gentlemen, I've been wondering where all this them and us started. Coming from the mainline side of the company, and not ever having experienced any of it I have decided that it must be from the other side.

During my time spent in a smaller company that shall remain nameless, I met many people that spent their time wishing for bigger and better things. Sitting on taxiways around the place and seeing envy in peoples eyes as larger jets go by was quite sad in a way as people realised they hadn't aspired to the things that some others may have.

The only thing that I can say to you gentlemen is SIZE REALLY DOESN'T MATTER, or at least that what the misses says!

[ 31 October 2001: Message edited by: le loup garou ]

thegirth
1st Nov 2001, 00:18
On a slightly different tack; Does the last in first out principle apply to a certain Direct Command "manager" brought in by our recently departed CEO?

fast cruiser
1st Nov 2001, 02:11
thegirth

the "Manager" in question has been kept on because he is "a Manager"
I guess the LIFO is one rule for one- one rule for 109!!!!

zbalata
1st Nov 2001, 02:14
Le loup garou,

I have worked in different capacities on both sides of the fence!!! In my eyes I would say that "the them and us" attitude is only from a certain few individuals.

The rest of us seem to have enough common decency, to support colleagues and friends from all areas of the business who now find themselves in very difficult situations.

My thoughts and support remain with them.
:rolleyes:

Stellina
1st Nov 2001, 03:12
Bash, you're right when you say that it's non-sense "persecuting"(a bit too strong a word?)those 7 pilots, and all my support to them(must be awful turning up for work in these days.
But this doesn't change the fact that they have been allowed to keep their seniority,and that it's ufair to those that joined mainline.
OR, also,how about someone that joined as ground staff/ops/C.crew...and LOST theirseniority simply because they transferred department?
If for instance theose 7 worked for klmuk or cityhopper, they wouldn't have kept their seniority going to mainline.
But , i remember correctly,BA has agreed to similar transfer "rghts" for Cityflier pilots.
Unfortunately unions probably didn't conside the possibilty of such a major redundancy crisis,but that should teach us all for the fututre.
One last thing: Anoxic has got a point,if the rule is in place, it shouldnt be one-sided,and seniority should be kept also going from mainline to regional

BASH D. BISHOP
1st Nov 2001, 13:34
Please re-read the earlier posts. Seniority date was not transferred. The 7 joined the bottom of the mainline seniority list. However, they kept their date of joining the group. It was not necessary to have this in the transfer agreement or alter the AFS. I am sure you will find that it is implied by UK employment law which overrides any internal company rules/procedures.

PaulDeGearup
1st Nov 2001, 14:32
Ok I'll say it agin. Obviously some of you can't read, even though you can type, and some simply stick their heads in the sand and ignore ( must be bmi managers).

Seniority and start date are not the same; the people in question have employee rights which are enshrined in law. The AFS is simply an agreement, your contractual rights, between BALPA (who negotiate on your behalf) and bmi.

Over riding that contract are your legal employee rights. GOTTIT!!!

Whether hayrick, bash or anyone else (me included) doesnt like it we have to lump it; only a change in the law will make any difference. The folks who retained their jobs at the "expense" of othre actually had longevity of service to protect them.

Agamemnon
1st Nov 2001, 15:10
Let's just have the relevant Act and Section - and date - of the 'employment law' referred to in some of the above posts, plus any recent case law decisions. Then we can base our arguements on fact, or otherwise.

Nebulous claims of 'it's the law' may be correct. If so, let's see what the relevant section says, and whether it is pertinent to this case.

My guess is that all those above claiming to be 'Midland' pilots are in fact former BusinessAir/Commuter people now working for bmir, who feel compelled by association to argue the case for the seven/eight/twelve. I can't say I blame them - it's human nature.

It's also human nature to fight tooth and nail to protect one's hard earned position in a respected company, and the security/income/mortgage it provides.

As has been said earlier, this was kept very quiet and, apart from a point of principle, would not have mattered much if things had remained as they were.

This is a good lesson for the future - watch what the lawyers are agreeing behind your backs.

However, bmi lawyers have not had a great track record in the past.

Bash
1st Nov 2001, 15:36
Jesus Christ I give up! The lawyers did not agree it the management did. It's got nothing to do with the seniority list and everything to do with length of service. (Thank you PDG for trying to get that one through!)The transfer agreement is a one way street because that's the way it was meant to be. If a bmir captain who lives in London could have gone with his command to LHR then I'm sure the bmi captain in LBA could have had the same deal. As for them and us and jealousy? The vast majority of senior bmir pilots would not and did not even contemplate transferring to bmi. Most like their job and lifestyle too much and certainly don't have a problem with size! The transfer agreement was put in place to keep the young and ambitious within the bmi group. The length of service clause was fair and is legally binding. If you don't agree and want to challenge it get yourself a lawyer (or get BALPA to shell out). I say again, to all those who have had bad news, I am truly sorry. But, banging on about this issue will not achieve anything. I'm now going to talk to a brick wall. Perhaps it will understand!