BA Pilots to ballot for strike over OpenSkies

[missive]

I find myself speechless in the face of such an erudite riposte. Three GCSE's and a CAA multi question exam I guess.

[overstress]

Doesn't merit a reply really, Courtney, but another operation that doesn't affect you or your contracts needs comment...

the BACC think that it does which is what the whole thing is about :hmm:

[lexoncd]

Sadly the great British public will not support your strike action if it was to go ahead. Nurses and other low paid professionals will always get the sympathy vote. Notice how support for fireman and even the police is sadly lacking. Times have changed and the majority of the public aren't in unions nor do they have the support of the public sector and so having experienced or about to experience changes in their own circumstances won't be too happif if again their two weeks in the sun is disrupted.

The city gent will simply postpone or most likely re-book with an alternative carrier. As for the regions well don't worry as the first flight BA cancel is the MAN shuttle so landing back into LHR and being told your on your own yet again is the Managements way of harming things

[Hand Solo]

Blimey what is it with you people and your 'public support' fixation? How many times do you have to be told we don't expect or need public support? Last time I checked you weren't flying the planes so whether you support the strike or not doesn't make one jot of difference.

[biddedout]

It has been mentioned briefly before, but where exactly do the pilots in BA’s other subsidiary company - City Flyer Mk2 stand in all this?

Under current agreements, unless the company replaces the RJ 100’s with RJ85’s (or similar), their work transfers back to Mainline two years from now. So, what will happen to those affected by this transfer of work? BACC seem quite happy to have them on the BA list, and yet the company refuses. The assumption therefore must be that in BA’s eyes, their positions will become redundant in 2010.

BA might find itself in a bit of a pickle if it tries all the usual tricks to wriggle out of its obligations to offer suitable alternative employment to these people within the group. Through various TUPE arrangements, many have 15 years or more service with their ultimate employer BA. Like it or not, BA pull the strings at CF and are ultimately responsible. The courts are likely to take a dim view if BA tries to hide behind its corporate structure and play the subsidiary game in attempt to dump workers in one part of the group at the same time as recruiting in another.

Using the selection process to avoid its responsibilities is not likely to impress either. Precedents were set when BACX cabin crew were made redundant and were offered positions in Mainline. No selection tests for them, just a token “motivational” interview (which surprise surprise, they all passed). What is good enough for them should be good enough for pilots, particularly since they have been flying BA’s aircraft since 2001. They didn’t apply for the post, they were bought by BA.

If I was a CF pilot, I would be finding myself a good employment lawyer right now and demanding that WW now states exactly what he plans for CF staff in two years time. If there is no firm plan (in writing) to delver appropriate airframes then I would be demanding my place on the BA list right now, ahead of anyone recruited into OS. I would also expect full support from BACC and BALPA HQ.

So BA, if as you appear to be insisting there is no need to rework the agreements, what exactly do you intend to do with CF and its staff? Perhaps this should be sorted out first, before charging off on another subsidiary frolic.

[Human Factor]

Didn't realise I was masquerading? I was always under the impression that anyone who really gave a stuff knew who I was..... ;)

Could be worse though. I've never failed to notice and take heed of the following which is written at the bottom of the homepage:

As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, to elicit certain reactions.

Well LHR747, as we know you're not the press...... :rolleyes:

[exeng]

What an arrogant bunch of clowns you Nigels are.

Why do you feel the need to be so abusive. Your points could have been put accross in a better way I'm sure.

there are more than a few cock ups in your cupboards.

BA have always been very open about their 'cock-ups' so that we can all learn from them.

It would seem that you believe the Daily Mail and all aclaiming your 'heroes' for saving 150 pax from certain death

I don't think any BA pilots are claiming the duo were heroes, but I'm very glad I wasn't faced with their scenario because I'm not too sure the outcome would have been quite so good - how about you?


People have got to be crazy to book flights with BA, one can never be sure that you prima donnas will bother to turn up for work.

When was the last time that BA Pilots went out on strike then? I believe it was back when the 747 classic was introduced - they have been turning up for work for several decades since then.


Now to get away from Courtney (whoever he is), I understand (I think!) the reason why you are worried about 'open skies', but I would like to try and understand what will be achieved by industrial action to prevent it?

This question was asked by a BA F/O mate of mine a few days ago, and despite being a far brighter fellow I was a little perplexed.

The discussion went along the lines of 'no more expansion possible at LHR so BA need to find it elsewhere'.

My F/O mate was worried that his going on strike could be for 'nought' because there would always be a 100% presence at LHR and therefore there would never be a threat to current pilots T & C's.

I asked him to contact his BACC rep soonest.

Forgive my ignorance, but could somebody clearly state here what BALPA's objective's are and what the objection is. My only concern is to make sure my friend puts the right tick in the box.

Over to you Mr Judkins.

[E. MORSE]

Balpa's objective : OpenSkies planes should be flown by BA pilots.

Why ? : because they're BA planes.

[StudentInDebt]

The BACC would like to discuss changing Schedule K to reflect the new regulatory environment - specifically the introduction of the Openskies Pt1 agreement. Part of Schedule K is designed to promote job security and career progression for BA pilots but, as it was written prior to Openskies agreements being considered, only applies to the UK. BA have refused (and continue to refuse) to discuss any amendment to Schedule K and therefore the BACC and BA are in dispute.

[courtney]

Well Exeng read Mick Stability's post plus a few others on this thread and you may see why so many of us in this industry think of BA as we do. As for what any of us would do to 'save a 150 lives' same as they did, flare a bit and wait. So the pilots haven't been on strike for a while, unfortunately just about everyone else has or are threatening to, the other problem is that the BA staff always give the impression thet they are doing you a big favour letting you on the aircraft. For longhaul, always use the far eastern carriers, they provide a service.

[ShortfinalFred]

Well Courtney, you epitomise the reason reading pprune has become such a stale and unrewarding exercise - bitterness personified. Why not take the blinkers off marked "hate BA" for a change.

[overstress]

It's the green-eyed monster again in a different form. Once again, no-one in this dispute is forcing anyone outside to comment and nor do we care what you think, as we have the support from the people we need, thanks.

We'll just get on with it in our own time. :ugh:

[NACUD]

This has developed into a classic Pprune thread when the moment someone disagrees, out come the flamethrowers, which become more thunderous with each individual who has the audacity to express a different opinion.

This thread clearly demonstrates the arrogance, selflessness and hypocrisy of those BA pilots who consider themselves above all others.

By all means fight your corner at fortress Heathrow and mount a strong defence of the T & Cs of BA mainline and any agreements in place should they be threatened. I suspect the T & Cs can only be changed/reduced/improved by negotiation between the company and the BA line pilots association.

Is it not hypocritical to ask for an IALPA recruitment ban unless BA capitulates and those who join do so at the bottom of the BA seniority list? The blatant perception and selfish expectation seems to be that those joining the new airline will guarantee that current pilots remain in their comfort zone and retain their T & Cs. It was only a few short years ago BA pilots (when their T & Cs were not deemed to be under threat), along with BALPA and the support of BA management connived to trample all over the Dan Air seniority list and allow those individuals who were employed to be on inferior contracts. They also gave authority to BA to employ US Air pilots during the summer that followed. Something that only the IPA was prepared to object too, and which resulted in the D of T withdrawing their support for the arrangement. The subsequent out of court settlement was in favour of the Dan Air pilots. It also enabled some individuals discarded at the time Dan was bought to be employed.

Some BA pilots may not have noticed the aviation industry throughout the world is undergoing substantial change and all companies are endeavouring to adjust and modify their business model. The new rules relating to open skies in Europe have forced every airline to review its income stream and costs by offering different products to the travelling public. In this day and age the passengers seem to be demanding both low cost short and long haul flights, while another substantial segment are still prepared to pay a premium for the full monty. Consequently we are seeing the start of the more established companies effectively running 2 airlines, using different business models and cost bases as they attempt to compete with, in the eyes of some BA pilots, the “upstarts” who have had the cheek to enter the fray and threaten their existence.

I just wonder what right BA pilots think they have to threaten industrial action that will not only affect all the other employees and passengers booked on the proposed strike days as well as the shareholders and possibly the future of their airline. It is not their decision as to the future business plans their management may wish to attempt to exploit. If the new airline’s T & Cs do not meet the aspirations then few will join and those that do will probably leave, whether they are on the BA seniority list or not and BA will have shot itself in the foot if it cannot recruit and retain good quality employees.

By all means try and persuade BA management why the pilots for the new airline should be on your seniority list but if you walk out the door over the issue do not expect any substantial support from any other quarter or the travelling public or the media. It would be extremely naïve and conceited to believe that any support could be ignored.

No airline has a God given right to exist, and there have been numerous examples of companies, both in aviation and outside, that have failed because they have not adapted to a changing world. BA pilots may disagree, but unless the airline they work for moves with the times the profits they are currently enjoying may disappear.

[Husky One]

It's interesting that several posters on here believe they don't need public support. Whilst it may not necessarily be the at the top of the strike actions list it is nonetheless significant. I'd be surprised if the BACC thought differently. Be under no illusion that the BA PR machine will demonise you as soon as you step up to the brink so ignore the public at your peril.

[Autobrake Low]

NACUD thanks for your rhetoric there but you clearly have no valuable insight into the issues at stake here. BA pilots like many other airlines pay subscription to BALPA the union. BALPA as a result work hard to protect our job security and terms and conditions. These wiser men than myself have decreed there is a clear and present threat to those aforementioned conditions and have spent a great deal of time to illustrate that threat in newsletters and emails etc. It is now upto the BA pilots to vote on what action to take.
Of course we will fight to protect our terms and conditons -it does not make BA pilots arrogant or selfish - just normal!!! And whilst you wax lyrical about the changing environment and other airlines adjusting their business models and us BA lot being inflexible and holding paying joe public to ransom - why not ask yourself why all other airlines taking advantage of openskies -i.e. Air France from LHR to US, are not also trying this 'secondary pilot workforce manoeuvre that BA are? Why they are content to just use their mainline pilots? We smell a rat and will fight for it. Just because you are too weak to do so - return to your cupboard and cower whilst we take a stand!

[ShortfinalFred]

NACUD = BA management. Or, just another BA hater. Classic stuff. Blame BALPA for the Danair debacle then say "management must have the right to manage", and screw every BA pilot from here to kingdom come. And if you think it wont affect the Independants then think on. Once Open Lies becomes the Trojan Horse BA plan it to be, every UK airline will adopt a similar tactic and away go your T and C's too.

This is not quite yet a Fascist Country. The right to strike is just that, a right in a free society, rightly governed by rules to see that it is the view of the majority of a work group. BA pilots have that right and have shown great reluctance to exercise it. Of course John Torrode and other Journalists at the Daily Mail with an agenda to run will demonise pilots. Ignoring their political agenda is the best tactic.

BALPA does not have a track record of militancy and has, in the view of many, acted with restraint and diffidence for years. This is the BA, after all, who blew ALL staff bonuses on an $850 million fine for price fixing, or so it is alleged. How do you deal in good faith with that? The answer is now that it is quite clear that you can not. WW wants a fight with his most loyal staff group and now he has got one. I believe he will lose, just as he did at Aer Lingus over the Belfast basing argument, another piece of classic attempted "union-busting".

[Shaka Zulu]

I feel truly saddened reading this thread now.
It was one of useful debate until people can't be bothered to read and get to the nub of the problem before posting a reaction.

The in-fighting in this industry is 2nd to none and also the amount of hostility from both sides is staggering.

Having been on the other side of the fence for a number of years flying with the big Orange company, I KNOW how important the role has been of the BALPA Company Council in the airline.
And to be honest guys, if I wanted to fly shorthaul for the rest of my life, I would have stayed at EZY. The money was way better for a good number of years (when you need it most) and not flying out of LHR is an absolute breath of fresh air.
It was just time to move on and look for a different challenge as opportunity came up.

Jealousy plays NO part in this. And anybody that feels the need to attack us just for the sake of T&C's has to grow up and smell the roses.

For anyone to think that their T&C's will not be affected (in the short/medium/long run) is clearly short sighted and has no understanding of simple economics.
Someone has to tow the line (and in Europe that tends to be the legacy carriers). Our salaries are benchmarked and knowing several people (captains/fo's in Lufthansa/KLM/Iberia), I also know that our salaries are NOT the nub of the problem.
It's simple corporate greed.

Our issue is not with lower start up T&C's and the flexibility OpenSkies need to fight in this tight margined world (and be assured, margins will get less and less the more aviation skies get de-regulated).
Our issue is Schedule K and has to do with our aircraft/our bottom line/our managers and ultimately our bread and butter.
For someone to say, what has it got to do with you I can only say one thing....
You really do need to pay more attention to the world we live in!!!!!

Schedule K is NOT fit for the new regulatory environment we live in.
How can cost or flexibility be an issue if the mechanisms that BALPA have offered clearly
are aimed at being helpful.

My apologies for leaving you to it, my fight is with BA over this.
Support is not directly required. We'll brief the City appropriately of that I'm sure. Just as we did over the pension issue. (I have bones to pick about NAPS and BARP, since I'm on BARP, but the BACC has done very well of late in making it an acceptable pension scheme)

Leave the old toys in the pram

[M.Mouse]

NACUD

Like many posters you are plainly missing the point, which has been repeatedly made.

BA pilots are not trying to scupper whatever business plans BA mis-management wish to try. BA pilots are not asking for Ts & Cs comparable to mainline. BA pilots are asking that any pilot employed to fly a BA aeroplane, using BA resources, run by BA management, on a BA AOC is flown by a pilot, whether a new recruit directly into Open Lies or an existing BA pilot, who is placed on the BA pilot seniority list.

It would cost ZILCH. It has to be asked why BA is impacably opposed to a nil cost item. Nothing to do with having a hidden agenda to screw us in the future I do not suppose.

It grieves me to damage our already tattered reputation. It grieves me to inconvenience our long suffering passengers. On the other hand I am working to the legal maximum that I can physically work, I have accepted massive changes to my current working agreements, I have accepted massive changes to my pension arrangements but I have reached the point where I will NOT accept an underhand, unnecessary, divisive change promoted by a greedy, here today gone tomorrow, short termist management who will ride off into the sunset in a year or two with obscene amounts of money having just screwed my future.

The line has been reached. Whether we have public support or not, whether the unpleasant anti-BA rhetoric and insults from others with an axe to grind continues here or not. I will strike (for the first time ever in my life) over this issue.

A common seniority list is A NIL COST ISSUE but it does give me a small chance of preventing BA mainline being unnecessarily decimated in the ever faster race to the bottom of the heap. Is that so hard to understand?

[Re-Heat]

It is inherently not a nil-cost issue, as the ability of OpenSkies recruits to then "move up" to mainline would create new hiring requirements and training costs that would not otherwise be the case: furthermore, those recruits would join the business in London at a higher pay point than new recruits who are currently recruited directly into the London business, raising the cost for both businesses as a result.

You and I both know that BA want it separate to create a lower-cost business away from London - your negotiations with management could create the protection to prevent it operating from London airports at any time in the future - the danger to the current pilot workforce is that the London business becomes the stale rump of BA if OpenSkies is truly successful and expands greatly.

The business of BA pilots flying BA planes on a BA AOC is irrelevant - (a) as they intend to run a new AOC, and (b) as the precedents in the past of other fully-owned or outsourced operations both past and present.

Don't skirt around the issue M.Mouse / Hand Solo - the real danger to BA pilots is the new operation being a success, with no mainline pilot access.

[Re-Heat]

Of course, I forgot to mention, but the whole attitude of BA management to the development of this plan is highly typical of poor management. Whereas a good manager would consult his workforce before plans are made, to get them onboard with the development of the operation, in this case they appear to simply have presented it as a fait accompli.

The problem of a workforce and management at loggerheads is simply unforgivable in an age of huge amounts of management training - MBA courses and the like - none of which would advocate this course of action. Perhaps BA are not recruiting enough fresh, young MBAs, and still have too many old codgers from the times of the nationalised business.

Another round of management cuts seem in order...

[Human Factor]

Be under no illusion that the BA PR machine will demonise you ....

Anyone who has read the BA News for the past decade will tell you that we're under no illusions that we have been for a while. :rolleyes:

[M.Mouse]

The problem of a workforce and management at loggerheads is simply unforgivable in an age of huge amounts of management training - MBA courses and the like - none of which would advocate this course of action. Perhaps BA are not recruiting enough fresh, young MBAs, and still have too many old codgers from the times of the nationalised business.

An understandable assumption but with the exception of the lower echelons of flight technical and flight training management who are universally respected the vast majority of BA management are not from the nationalised era but do endeavour to be seen as though they are.

[Re-Heat]

Or rather...inducted into the nationalised culture of the company in the late 80s / early 90s before it was exposed to competitive pressures.

[BottyTotty]

I am not a Nigel, but I see big pitfalls ahead with Open Skies if you are not carefull.

I work for a company, that is as divisive as it comes, and that division leads to groups of pilots played off against others with a general trend of lowering of T&C's.

It's happening all over the world in Airlines that are not sufficiently unionised.

I don't believe any management williningly wants to pay you as much as they can, they all want to pay you the minimum they can get away with and keep the Planes Moving.

Staffing is just another cost.

But we are BA LHR with 100% pilot unity?

The danger, and I would suggest long term management strategy of Open Skies, will be to increase it's size and presence (on much lower Pilot T&C's) whilst allowing the well represented and better paid BA mainline group of pilots numbers dwindle with downsizing and non replacement of retirees and those who leave.

Open Skies will slowly supercede BA on certain routes.

This will not affect you in the short term, but if open skies which has considerbaly lower unit costs for staff, starts to become a success.

It will be this higher margin business that will be used to try and break the hold on your T&C's that you rightly have.

BA is looking at how it can compete in the future with Low cost, long haul and for that you should tread very carfeully.

Not having any more expansion out of LHR is bull, it's about costs.

[Hand Solo]

the real danger to BA pilots is the new operation being a success, with no mainline pilot access

I agree entirely. There is also the secondary danger of BA being allowed to set up a secondary strike-busting airline to undermine any future industrial action. Whichever way you cut it, if we don't resist BA now then we can kiss goodbye to our futures in BA.

[swordsman]

Re Heat
I think you will find that these days training costs are negligable once within BA due to the advent of zero flight time training.
You will also find that BALPA have offered the company a zero cost option which is not good enough it would seem.:ugh:

[Noiffsorbuts]

I dont know what you are all so worried about!!

To the best of my knowledge BA have consistently, spectacularly failed to run any subsidiary operation profitably......and it looks as if one or two of the key players responsible for the CX abomination have been given significant roles.....Didnt I see Maynard's name there somewhere?....Same faces....same outcome.

If I recall correctly, the only time an offshoot threatened to be a success...ie GO....it was dumped and Rod Eddington went on record at the time as stating that one of the reasons for disposal was that it was becoming too successful and was competing with the established BA operation!!

I really dont think current BA management are capable of running anything other than their LHR operation with its cash cow routes and no real world competition.

Good luck anyway!..........There can only be one winner in this and it will be very messy for the loser.

[Re-Heat]

I think you will find that these days training costs are negligable once within BA due to the advent of zero flight time training. You will also find that BALPA have offered the company a zero cost option which is not good enough it would seem.
It is not zero cost if you consider the logic that I wrote above the quote of mine you selected. ZFT training is still a cost, and the consumate step up in the PP at which people would enter the mainline business is certainly a cost to the company.

Nevertheless that is not the relevant point as to why you would wish to challenge management on this project. You would challenge them on it marginalising you in the business if it is a success (unless it is flogged aswas GO).

[Hand Solo]

Unfortunately the management don't wish to be challenged on that point and simply ignore the question. I've posed it several times and am still waiting for a response.

[swordsman]

Re Heat
you are off on a tangent.
I never said zero cost I said negligable cost.You must have gone to a grammar school.

[Dysag]

Accident threads on PPrune are full of lively speculation.

In this thread there is virtually no speculation about why Little Willy apparently wants the strike to go ahead.

What kind of trap is Wily Willy setting?

[biddedout]

If anyone plans to play the subsidiary game and join OS, bear in mind that you will be forever reminded where you stand in the operation.


You will be expected to contribute to the bottom line of the parent – naturally.
You will be expected to take the hits along with the rest of the BA staff in the lean times.
You will not share in the spoils of BA’s success in the good times, because you are only a subsidiary. Talk to anyone in the engineering offshoots.
You will have the pleasure of enjoying your £10 M&S voucher at Christmas when the BA people within your company get to bank hundreds if not thousands as their slice of the BA profit share.
The reason why BA want to keep clear blue water between the main operation and subsidiaries is (according to its former Ops Director) because “it is cheaper and easier to get rid of staff from a subsidiary if the need arises”. Nice!:ok:
Would have like to see them try it though. Not so easy to dispose of the riff raff if you cant find someone to give it away to.:rolleyes:

As for the training cost argument, it never failed to amaze BACon staff that the company believed that it was better to train and type-rate new pilots from scratch into a BA subsidiary and accept that they would be scooped up by their competitors; BMI, Virgin, Easy, TF etc, rather than to use the subsidiary as a training ground for the main company. How many other industries work like this? Oh how BMI regional must have chuckled when they found that they could pick up 20+ fully rated pilot for nothing simply because the parent company BA showed absolutely no interest in giving these people any chance of progressing within their own ever shrinking operation or redeploment within the group.

Oh and when they do close you down, mind you don’t get trampled when the leeches with ties to the mother-ship scramble for the exits. The early signs are when a few senior managers make their excuses and slither back to HQ were their talents are needed for “urgent important projects”. Suddenly, you will realise that the only managers left are the home grown variety who will suddenly find they are having to deal with the redundancies.

Meanwhile, those who slithered back to Waterworld will have forgotten all about what was just a bad dream.



Only slightly bitter of Bristol:yuk:

[M.Mouse]

In this thread there is virtually no speculation about why Little Willy apparently wants the strike to go ahead.

What kind of trap is Wily Willy setting?

A good question to which I do not have an answer.

The question does have to be asked how he has managed to provoke a strike amongst cabin crew, a ballot for a strike amongst the pilots who last had a strike in 1980 and now the cabin crew are balloting again for another walk out!

He provoked a pilot's strike in Aer Lingus.

That is some record when compared with the likes of Rod Eddington, a man who at least told you the truth when you asked him a question despite not always liking the answer.

I have personal experience of Mr. Walsh denying all knowledge of an event despite a few of us knowing at the time that his memory was letting him down.

[biddedout]

Ah, the memory problem.

Similar to when he rebranded and relaunched a subsidiary with warning that it had two years to break even. He forgot to say that he was already in discussions with the new owner.

[LIMA OR ALPHA JUNK]

NACUD, I seem to remember you backing the MYT management not so long ago to bring in Canadian captains at Thomas Cook this summer while British pilots there were under threat of demotion and redundancy.

Are you sure you're not some kind of mangement stooge ? Or are you really an "i'm alright jack" senior captain that has no regard for the T & Cs further down the food chain ?

No offence, but you really seem to lend little support to your pilot colleagues.

Good luck you guys at BA. Time to draw a line in the sand :ok:

[NACUD]

Lima,

I have no wish for this thread to be hijacked and I suggest you re-read my posts as your recollection and understanding of what I wrote is incorrect.

Your following paragraphs are also without foundation.

You may or may not be aware that the TCX CC has been forced into a major climb down now that there are to be no compulsory redundancies or demotions and are allowing pilots, including up to 15 Captains, from Canada, to fly for TCX this summer.

[52049er]

I too think Willy has a massive hidden motive for this. Here's my prediction.

BA pilots vote 90%+ for IA.

BALPA and BA go back to talks

During the talks OS is 'postponed' indefinitely and fault put at BALPA's door

BA buy BMI

BA tell BALPA that all SH is now on BMI T&C's or SH is canned for good

Carnage.

Happy to see if I'm right in 3 months time.

[Open Lies]

If you really are a pilot 52049er, and you are wishing for the SH pilot community in BA to take a big pay cut post a merger, you are one twisted unintelligent chap or chapess. :\:mad:

What would that do to T&Cs throughout the industry ?

Please engage brain before opening gob.

[Dave Bloke]

During the talks OS is 'postponed' indefinitely and fault put at BALPA's door.

Whether or not OS is postponed is up to BA. However it would not stop a strike from going ahead. The strike is about Schedule K (Scope), not specifically Open Skies.:ugh:

Also, don't you think the BMI pilots would have a bit of an issue about not having their T&Cs raised to BA mainline levels?;)

[M.Mouse]

Last night there was standing room only at a BA BALPA meeting at LHR. Over 10% of the BA pilots attended. Given the number working, the number living too far away and others with prior commitments it demonstrated the importance placed on this issue. I have never attended a GMM where the consensus was quite so unanimous.

Several BA flight ops managers and BALPA members were in attendance. One of them bravely spoke during the Q & A session after the speakers but it was very clear that flight ops management do not know the full story themselves!

Captain Evan Cullen from IALPA, who is a long serving Aer Lingus pilot, was very interesting having witnessed Mr. Walsh LEADING a strike in Aer Lingus when he (WW) was an IALPA pilot rep. He had also been heavily involved in the strike at Aer Lingus when Mr. Walsh was CEO. It was illuminating to gain an insight into what we are dealing with, his tactics and general attitude. Mr. Walsh was less than successful in his aims of beating IALPA members then as I sincerely hope he will be in this dispute. Captain Cullen made it very clear that Mr. Walsh knows EXACTLY what this is all about.

[Autobrake Low]

Interesting stuff M.Mouse - Unfortunately I could not attend last night - did BALPA reps put across convincing argument for the 'undecided'? Was the general feeling that most members are, albeit reluctantly, in favour of industrial action?

[52049er]

Blimey Open Lies - bit aggressive....:hmm:

Where in my crystal ball gazing does it say I think the SH pilots should get a pay cut? And where does it say you can't speculate on rumours ('cos yes I've heard that BMI rumour direct from Waterworld) on a rumour network?

Ah well, off to play flight sim with some nicer boys.....

[Dave Bloke]

Where in my crystal ball gazing does it say I think the SH pilots should get a pay cut?

Here, by inference:

BA tell BALPA that all SH is now on BMI T&C's or SH is canned for good.



FWIW, I've heard the BMI rumour as well.

[52049er]

Still don't see it, but if the weaknesses of my written style infer it, then, to be clear, its not what I meant. Its just the passing on of a rumour.

Now, is Flaps up <ctrl>F or just F?

[yetanotherdawn]

Isn't it about time this went on the BA dedicated forum? I can't help feeling that neither BA nor BALPA are quite as desperately essential to everyone else's life/job/pay/conditions as some posters on this thread seem to believe (I haven't read all of the 25 pages or so because it's too boring).

Whilst I can fully understand that the BA fraternity will wish to protect themselves from the cold winds of commercial reality, for the many who are not a part of that august establishment does a new airline not offer a new opportunity? For them is it not A Good Thing? I don't know what the pay and conditions are as I'm not interested but if they are not good enough they won't get the people and if they do then they won't stay. If that is what happens then the management will have the choice of improving them or shutting up shop presumably.

Some years back the Germans did something similar with Suedflug, Condor and Lufthansa; did the LH mainline chaps suffer as a result? I don't think they did ... but I stand to be corrected.

The commercial reality of the new operation may well be that it cannot be competetive in the market and support the lavish lifestyle and restrictive practices that are enjoyed by BA mainline.

And just to anticipate some of the possible objections to me venturing to suggest that the sun does not actually shine out of the collective BA orifice; yes I am a pilot, yes I do know BA pilots past and present, yes I have been around a long time and worked for a number of different outfits in various sectors of the industry, and no I don't really care one way or another whether BA's new baby lives or dies on the breast.

Oh, yes, and I did used to be a member of BALPA but soon realised that unless I was in BA it was nothing more than an exorbitant subscription to a magazine that had no relevance to life outside BA (although it was two separate airlines back then).

Can't hang around here all day gossiping ...

[M.Mouse]

Interesting stuff M.Mouse - Unfortunately I could not attend last night - did BALPA reps put across convincing argument for the 'undecided'? Was the general feeling that most members are, albeit reluctantly, in favour of industrial action?

The arguments were almost self explanatory. The three guest speakers (representing AA, QANTAS and IALPA) were unanimous in urging us not to allow ourselves to be undermined in the future they way the AA and QANTAS pilots had sleep walked themselves into a bleak future.

Judging from the letters from pilot associations from around the world, on display for all to read, this is a worldwide drive by airline management in generaland we are being watched with interest by those other associations.

I attend most GMMs when they are held and was amazed and gratified at the overwhelming support that the BACC have on this issue.

Isn't it about time this went on the BA dedicated forum? I can't help feeling that neither BA nor BALPA are quite as desperately essential to everyone else's life/job/pay/conditions as some posters on this thread seem to believe...

No, it is a worldwide issue.

... (I haven't read all of the 25 pages or so because it's too boring).

Then go one further and stop reading it at all.

Whilst I can fully understand that the BA fraternity will wish to protect themselves from the cold winds of commercial reality, for the many who are not a part of that august establishment does a new airline not offer a new opportunity? For them is it not A Good Thing? I don't know what the pay and conditions are as I'm not interested but if they are not good enough they won't get the people and if they do then they won't stay. If that is what happens then the management will have the choice of improving them or shutting up shop presumably.

Plainly you have not only not read this thread but also not observed American Eagle, Jetstar and WW's attempts to stuff the Aer Lingus pilots. It is not about OpenLies pay and conditions.

The commercial reality of the new operation may well be that it cannot be competetive(sic) in the market....

It can.

...and support the lavish lifestyle and restrictive practices that are enjoyed by BA mainline.

Lavish lifestyle! I am lost for words. Restrictive practices? You clearly know nothing about today's BA!

And just to anticipate some of the possible objections to me venturing to suggest that the sun does not actually shine out of the collective BA orifice; yes I am a pilot, yes I do know BA pilots past and present, yes I have been around a long time and worked for a number of different outfits in various sectors of the industry, and no I don't really care one way or another whether BA's new baby lives or dies on the breast.

Far better to keep your unpleasant bile to yourself then.

Oh, yes, and I did used to be a member of BALPA but soon realised that unless I was in BA it was nothing more than an exorbitant subscription to a magazine that had no relevance to life outside BA (although it was two separate airlines back then).

Again you clearly have little comprehension of how the world has changed. There are just over 3,000 BA pilots. BALPA membership is around the 10,000 mark off the top of my head. That represents.....well you can work it out.

We do happen to contribute the largest share of BALPA's subscription income by virtue of our salaries. I am happy to do so because it is in all our interests that BALPA is well funded in order to represent us all as well as is humanly possible. That includes the freeloaders like yourself.

[bobmij]

Excuse me.
I would like to be better informed about this issue. Where can I go to read about the BA management perspective. That's to say, the stuff they wrote, not someone else.
Thanks
(sorry if it's obvious)

[overstress]

Quite frankly, bobmij, the management stuff you refer to is meaningless and self-contradictory as it has been written by people who haven't even seen the business plan.

The true intent of OS is being kept a very close secret by those above WW...

[bullshot]

I have a certain ambivalence about this whole subject of Openskies.

Being a strong BALPA member and supporter I will always support a group of Pilots who are engaged in a tussle with Management to preserve their terms and conditions.

But there is something about this Openskies business that indicates to me that it is not just BA Pilots squaring up to BA Management - it is also about BA Pilots also exercising their muscle to the disadvantage of other non-BA Pilots. It appears that they want the work for themselves to the exclusion of others in the same way as was done in GSS and BACON with F/O's from BA parachuted in as Captains with no consideration for the F/O's already in those Airlines.

Right now I don't buy the notion that Openskies is BA Pilots work, however I remain open to be persuaded. But I see it as follows - and please bear in mind that I might not be Mr Bullshot; I could be Monsieur Bullshot or Herr Bullshot:

As Monsieur Bullshot I might reasonably object to being excluded from flying my own countrymen to/from my own country under the highly dubious argument that it is 'BA Pilots work'. Similar for Herr Bullshot.
Neither is it likely that they would be using BA Aircraft. The 757 is an obsolete aircraft. BA would be disposing of some of them to Openskies - in the same way that they disposed of 757s to DHL for example. I don't remember BA pilots demanding that they fly all of DHL's night freight, so why should that argument hold up with Openskies?
The Management of Opensies might come from BA, but you can be sure they will be employed by Openskies, not BA. Someone previously mentioned that IT systems will be BA's - this is really scraping the barrel for excuses, but in any case, I was informed that an Airline that used to employ me has a contract for some IT services with Openskies. It seems that WW will have it all covered...

I am therefore, still quite perplexed as to why there is an IFALPA ban on employment. How did you BA guys twist that one?

In any event, I can't help feeling that you Chaps might be fighting the right war, but you have chosen the wrong battlefield. It will be interesting to see how it all pans out but please Guys, stay calm and keep the silly insults on Pprune down a bit.

Cheers
BS

[Hand Solo]

bobmij - you could look for any posts by LHR747, Compass Centre or UKPilot2. They are all written by the same BA manager. Otherwise if you're not employed by BA there's nothing much in the public domain.

[blimey]

Jeepers, bullshot, how many times:

it is also about BA Pilots also exercising their muscle to the disadvantage of other non-BA Pilots.

It's about putting those joining OS onto the BA mainline seniority list, so protecting them, BA pilots, and just about every other Brit pilots' Ts and Cs from future attack.

blimey.

[M.Mouse]

But there is something about this Openskies business that indicates to me that it is not just BA Pilots squaring up to BA Management - it is also about BA Pilots also exercising their muscle to the disadvantage of other non-BA Pilots. It appears that they want the work for themselves to the exclusion of others in the same way as was done in GSS and BACON with F/O's from BA parachuted in as Captains with no consideration for the F/O's already in those Airlines.

GSS is a whole different argument and, incidentally, GSS management recently wrote to BALPA calling for an end to secondments completely. Funny enough one of BA's ploys to placate us over OpenLies is.......secondments but then only for the first 6 aircraft.

Right now I don't buy the notion that Openskies is BA Pilots work, however I remain open to be persuaded. But I see it as follows - and please bear in mind that I might not be Mr Bullshot; I could be Monsieur Bullshot or Herr Bullshot:

As Monsieur Bullshot I might reasonably object to being excluded from flying my own countrymen to/from my own country under the highly dubious argument that it is 'BA Pilots work'. Similar for Herr Bullshot.

You are approaching this from the wrong angle. We are saying that any pilot employed by BA at OpenLies should become a BA pilot, not that we are demanding the work for ourselves. If a current BA pilot wished to lower his Ts and Cs by moving across to Open Skies then a vacancy withinm mainline would have to be filled by recruiting a pilot into mainline. i.e.wherever a pilot comes from a new recruit will have to be hired whether into OpenLies or into mainline BUT we wish that new recruit to be recruited to the normal BA criteria and have a BA master seniority list number.

Your argument regarding Herr/Monsieur/Senor Bullshot is spurious. All European natiuonals have the right to live and work in any part of the EEA. BA employ many European pilots in London.

.....neither is it likely that they would be using BA Aircraft. The 757 is an obsolete aircraft. BA would be disposing of some of them to Openskies - in the same way that they disposed of 757s to DHL for example. I don't remember BA pilots demanding that they fly all of DHL's night freight, so why should that argument hold up with Openskies?

It doesn't but like QANTAS losing all the new B787s ordered for them but now going to Jetstar the danger is all new aircraft will go to an ever expanding OpenLies with the separate pilot workforce forever locked into inferior Ts & Cs. A study of Amreican Eagle is illuminating.

I am therefore, still quite perplexed as to why there is an IFALPA ban on employment. How did you BA guys twist that one?

In any event, I can't help feeling that you Chaps might be fighting the right war, but you have chosen the wrong battlefield.

Please , please look further down the road at a) what the trojan horse which is OpenLies has the potential to - do just like American Eagle and Jetstar and b) recognise that if it is us, 'the arrogant, greedy prima donnas with lavish lifestyles and restrictive practices', now who do you think will be next?

[Hand Solo]

it is also about BA Pilots also exercising their muscle to the disadvantage of other non-BA Pilots. It appears that they want the work for themselves to the exclusion of others in the same way as was done in GSS and BACON with F/O's from BA parachuted in as Captains with no consideration for the F/O's already in those Airlines.

GSS only fly cargo from BA. Their only customer is BA. They fly using BA callsigns. Their pilots deadhead on BA flights using BA duty travel tickets. Without BA they do not exist. The inclusion of BA pilots on the Captains list at GSS was the price BA agreed to pay to be allowed to outsource up to 4 aircrafts worth of work.

BACON. The only BA secondees in BACON were on the RJ100 fleet. They flew aircraft that had been handed over from mainline, they flew them from BA bases and they flew them on BA routes. The BACX pilots at the time wanted the whole lot for themselves. The BAR pilots were adamant that their bases, routes and commands were not going to be handed over to a subsidiary airline. Nobody was going to get everything they wanted. BACX had the chance to take 12 aircraft, two bases and lots of routes and jobs at a time that they were contracting and their FO's looked very likely to be looking for new jobs. Secondees or not, they got a lifeline out of that deal and to say that BALPA screwed them is disingenuous at best. If the BACC had been minded to fight it BACX would have got nothing. As an aside, most of the secondees were either existing BAR Captains or BAR FOs who were due a command in the regions that year. Very few came up from London for a secondment.

As Monsieur Bullshot I might reasonably object to being excluded from flying my own countrymen to/from my own country under the highly dubious argument that it is 'BA Pilots work'. Similar for Herr Bullshot.

Could McBullshot reasonably object that he was excluded from flying GLA-JFK because he'd have to be employed by a London based airline to do it? If not, why should Monsieur or Herr Bullshot be treated differently?

Neither is it likely that they would be using BA Aircraft. The 757 is an obsolete aircraft. BA would be disposing of some of them to Openskies - in the same way that they disposed of 757s to DHL for example. I don't remember BA pilots demanding that they fly all of DHL's night freight, so why should that argument hold up with Openskies?

The 757s were sold to DHL, which when I last checked was outside the BA group. They were not transferred within the BA group to an independent group of pilots. This has rather more in common with the RJ100 transfer than the 757 sale.

The Management of Opensies might come from BA, but you can be sure they will be employed by Openskies, not BA.

Perhaps you are not familiar with the way BA work. The managers will all be seconded from BA on BA contracts. Just the way it was when BA managers ran BACX. If Open Skies fails then they'll be straight back to Waterworld.

Someone previously mentioned that IT systems will be BA's - this is really scraping the barrel for excuses

Don't forget to mention that the tickets will be sold through BA's website and call centres too. Strikes me as strange for an airline that BA management claim must be independent of BA mainline (unless it's a sales, IT or management function).

I am therefore, still quite perplexed as to why there is an IFALPA ban on employment. How did you BA guys twist that one?

Twist? I believe an IFALPA recruitment can be applied whenever a union is in dispute with an employer. No twisting required.

I can't help feeling that you Chaps might be fighting the right war, but you have chosen the wrong battlefield.

Well thanks for your support but there has to be a battle eventually and I'd rather do it now before Opes Skies gets off the ground than in two years time when BA decide to hand over a load of 787s to them. Perhaps BALPA should have fought the battle earlier, over GSS, or over the RJ handover, but at least the new leadership have learned from the mistakes of the old and don't intend to repeat them.

[bermudatriangle]

hand solo...very pertinent observations as always.i agree with all the points you mention.we always have to be prepared for management attempting to change conditions by stealth tactics.past attempts confirm that they will never stop in their relentless quest to erode pay and conditions by whatever means they can devise.i am always positive and welcoming of moving forward in an ever changing industry,but sadly,there is no trust between employees and management.if only we could all work together,with an agreed common agenda....what results we could achieve.sadly.i cannot see it happening.

[Human Factor]

Has it not occurred to Monsieur Bullshot and Herr Bullshot that they would actually become BA pilots if BALPA are successful.

It's not about keeping the work for current BA pilots and excluding everyone else, it's about securing all BA work for BA pilots present and future.

Try grasping the bigger picture, although as this particular gem has been mentioned a few times in this thread so far, I fear that will be missed along with your attention to detail.:ugh:

[lamina]

Guys, as a LHR resident flying different coloured aircraft you have my full support. As this issue is without doubt a very sharp end of a efing big wedge! To those of you bothering to reply to some of the simplistic waffle (I can't be bothered to pick out individual quotes), I feel your wasting your breath. Some one eyed people will never manage to see the whole picture, I amazed they ever pass their medical.

Come to think about it I'm surprised their general lack of situational awareness has not resulted in more smoking holes! If most are genuinely fellow pilots of course.

[Ray D'Avecta]

If a current BA pilot wished to lower his Ts and Cs by moving across to Open Skies........

Do I understand this quote from M.Mouse correctly? A current BA Pilot opting for Open skies would be effectively giving up their current contract for a new one?

[NigelOnDraft]

Ray Do I understand this quote from M.Mouse correctly? A current BA Pilot opting for Open skies would be effectively giving up their current contract for a new one? No... the offer to date is some secondees... Pay / Rostering etc. would be to the (lower) Ts&Cs, but they remain on a BA contract to return as/when. Of course, RHS BA => LHS OS/BA may see a pay improvement hence why they might bid...

NoD

[Ray D'Avecta]

Thanks for clarifying that.

As an outside observer, it all sounds very complicated and entrenched on both sides. I wish you guys and gals all the best in getting a satisfactory outcome.

[Roobarb]

It appears that they want the work for themselves to the exclusion of others . . .

Bullshot, you couldn't be more wrong. The common seniority list that BALPA/BACC seek would ensure that a pilot could freely move between Open Lies and Mainline BA.

This isn't jobs for the boys, this is to ensure that any pilot who joins any BA enterprise will have the ability to bid for any seat on the network. A pilot who gains employment with Open Lies would be automatically eligible to bid for any base/fleet/seat in big BA. That's what a common seniority list is all about.

Separate airlines with separate seniority lists and competing cost bases WOULD have pilots at each others throats, and that is the cat fight that Willy seeks to start.

We're not trying to screw up UK aviation, we're seeking to defend the very basis of our lifestyles, terms, conditions, and rostering.

http://www.tvradiobits.co.uk/tellyyears/Roobarb2.jpg
I'll take on the opposition anyday, it's my management I can't beat

[Openlies]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkZsPjQp3CM

[Terminal 5]

Whether or not OS is postponed is up to BA. However it would not stop a strike from going ahead. The strike is about Schedule K (Scope), not specifically Open Skies.:ugh:

Before this thread kicked off I was always under the impression that the dispute was purely about Openskies. I am sure many other people believe that as well.

So if BA postponed Openskies and then BALPA still went ahead with the strike anyway over schd K wouldn't this give BA the upper hand as they could say they are not threatening T & C's by postponing Openskies but BALPA are striking anyway? A PR coup for BA there?!?!?

[M.Mouse]

Do I understand this quote from M.Mouse correctly? A current BA Pilot opting for Open skies would be effectively giving up their current contract for a new one?

To further clarify what I meant I was referring to the achieved goal of a common seniority list meaning a BA mainline pilot could bid into OpenLies but he would be on OpenLies Ts & Cs. Someone might, for example, wish to live in Europe and operate from a European airport.

As NoD says a move could mean an improvement in money for a co-pilot changing seats with that move but losing the advantages of Bidline, etc.

So if BA postponed Openskies and then BALPA still went ahead with the strike anyway over schd K wouldn't this give BA the upper hand as they could say they are not threatening T & C's by postponing Openskies but BALPA are striking anyway? A PR coup for BA there?!?!?

WW is convinced that the pilots will not strike. His aim is to break the seniority system, BALPA and the pilot's strength along with it. He is so convinced I do not believe he will relinquish the opportunity this fight affords him.

[pacamack]

Excuse my ignorance, but I can't understand how any business is able to operate a "Seniority List" in this day and age?

Other businesses/sectors/industries realised long ago that ability often has little to do with seniority. You try specifying X years experience as a requirement on a public sector job description for example.

I would much sooner be flown to my destination by a good pilot than an old pilot.

[NigelOnDraft]

pacamack I would much sooner be flown to my destination by a good pilot than an old pilot. Firstly, seniority irrespective, anyone in either seat has to pass the appropriate courses etc. - and not all do :ouch:

Would you rather your pilots use seniority, which in some ways equates to experience (but not all ;) ) to govern who gets commands? Or by who takes the least fuel? Accepts the most defects? Exceeds the max duty hours by the largest amount? Who puts cost savings over safety? These might be the sort of criteria Management use to select their Captains in a non-Seniority structure :(

[overstress]

pacamack - welcome to the forum - this thread may not be for you if you don't understand how seniority is allowed, the whole seniority question is probably not one for this thread IMHO

[pacamack]

Nigel, I accept your first point but I would still argue that the greater proportion of businesses, organisations etc. out there have managed to implement non-seniority based career progression without the world coming down around their ears?

Overstress, surely it is at the core of the whole argument?

[Ray D'Avecta]

Having now understood the proposal for pilots bidding from mainline to OS, what is the reciprocal proposal if the OS pilots end up on one combined seniority list. Would they, upon succesfully bidding for mainline, be automatically transferred onto the better T&C's and a salary grade that takes into account their years in OS?

(I apologise if I am only looking at this from a pilots point of view. I'm sure there is a bigger picture :})

[Airbus Unplugged]

Consultant paediatrician? More brass? Neh, I'd rather have our Lucy cut up by our butcher than waste good brass on experienced medicos.

Our Laithwaite's been cutting meat for two months now and I'd trust 'im with any of our pigs - and that's saying somut.

[Human Factor]

Having now understood the proposal for pilots bidding from mainline to OS, what is the reciprocal proposal if the OS pilots end up on one combined seniority list. Would they, upon succesfully bidding for mainline, be automatically transferred onto the better T&C's and a salary grade that takes into account their years in OS?

Yes. The fine details would probably require a bit of negotiation with BA. Primarily, would the OS pilot join the BA payscale at paypoint 1 or a higher paypoint based on their years of service with OS? My preference would be the latter.

[blimey]

pacamack

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=287026&highlight=seniority

On yer way. Nothing for you here.

blimey

[M.Mouse]

Nigel, I accept your first point but I would still argue that the greater proportion of businesses, organisations etc. out there have managed to implement non-seniority based career progression without the world coming down around their ears?

You accept NoD's first point but what about the more important second paragraph of his post?

To give you an idea of what the current system prevents. There was a manager, very, very senior and, not to put too fine a point on it, he was an unpeasant individual (since resigned over a particularly nasty event).

I know for a fact that he and another senior manager used to have a competition running between each other regarding how LITTLE fuel they could each carry over a given period. It was a nightmare to fly with either of them because they would use every legal trick in the book to reduce fuel to an absolute minimum.

Now imagine if I am a first officer with sufficient experience to gain a command. Imagine that manager is the arbiter of who is suitable. Would his judgement be based on my overall suitability or would someone who carried less fuel on average than I did win the day? If the winner was the person who used less fuel then would it not be beyond the realms of possibility that first officers nearing the level of experience necessary for command would endeavour to impress by reducing their comfort margins by carrying less fuel?

Simplified example but the seniority system does put the promotion to command firmly beyond factors and personalities which could have a detrimental effect on safety.

[bluepilot]

much as i am an advocate of the seniority system, i beg to disagree. If a manager (pilot) decides you are unfit for command your number might be up seniority wise but they can still make life very difficult for you to get that LHS.

anyway this is a move away from the point, openskys is a threat to the BA pilot force.........and agreed could effect future t and c, but the deal openskys offer most non BA pilots is quite attractive and some of those applicants may be BALPA members...difficult decision for those guys... personally i have seen in recent time just how "non" supportive BALPA can be to non BA members, its about time BALPA looked in its own back yard and realised that the MEMBERS pay their salary (yes thats you mr JM!). (just how much have the members benefited from the multi million sale of the site at new road?).

now before all you BA guys jump down my throat and tell me how much "we" need to fight this ... i agree we do!! but BALPA as a UNION (dont give me the association crap) ((OR TRY TO SELL ME MORE FINANCIAL SERVICES!!))) needs to support not just you guys but the minority as well.....and recently the support from the top (mr JM) has not been that good.

one of the BA members pointed out on here that we should support this action because BA lead the t and c every other BALPA member aspires too. What you guys need to realise is that sometimes for VERY GOOD REASONS some of us work for other companies and do not or cannot work for BA, BUT we may call upon your support on issues that may seem small to you!! BA is not the be all and end all.

rant over

good luck to all at BA. despite my seemingly anti post you really do have my utmost support.

[Hand Solo]

much as i am an advocate of the seniority system, i beg to disagree. If a manager (pilot) decides you are unfit for command your number might be up seniority wise but they can still make life very difficult for you to get that LHS.

I agree, but imagine how much fun it's going to be at Open Skies with a 'meritocratic' promotion system.

but the deal openskys offer most non BA pilots is quite attractive and some of those applicants may be BALPA members...difficult decision for those guys

Well I'd take issue with the attractiveness of the offer. The money might be OKish for captains but it's pretty poor for FOs and the proposed schedules are horrendously debilitating. Flying 900hrs per year on two crew transatlantic flights is not a job anyone will tolerate for more than 2-3 years. Even if people do find the prospect of that attractive, they have nothing to lose from the BA dispute. If the BA pilots win OS pilots will have the choice of staying with OS or moving to BA mainline. The choice is theirs. If BA pilots lose then OS pilots either stay where they are or go to another airline.

one of the BA members pointed out on here that we should support this action because BA lead the t and c every other BALPA member aspires too.

I've never believed that everyone aspires to BA, but for as long as somebody else pays more people will leave and employers feel the upward pressure on T&Cs. Once the top tier starts to come down that pressure on employers eases and it's not good for pilots.

What you guys need to realise is that sometimes for VERY GOOD REASONS some of us work for other companies and do not or cannot work for BA, BUT we may call upon your support on issues that may seem small to you!! BA is not the be all and end all.

I don't think I've met any BA pilots who wouldn't offer moral support to any other UK pilot body. We pay our subs to BALPA, and we pay more in than we get out, but we are willing to accept that for the greater good of the pilot body. We can't offer direct industrial support because that would be illegal, but we continue paying our subs into big BALPA even though we could realistically form our own union with our own money if we wanted to. BA employs pilots from all backgrounds and we stick with BALPA on the basis that we genuinely believe that the pilot body needs to stick together.

good luck to all at BA. despite my seemingly anti post you really do have my utmost support.

Thank you. We appreciate it.

[KC135777]

Good luck BA pilots.
The fight is generic...but here's a peek at ours:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=1 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1687753861837107342&q=Allied+Pilots+Association&total=4&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1)

and APA President's message to you:
http://www.baplane-bapilot.org/BALPA-Message-512K-Stream.mov

[stormin norman]

So as we have it BALPA want 3200 BA pilots to strike over a subsiduary one aircraft outfit that isn't even flying yet and who's terms and conditions won't affect any pilot presently flying within mainline BA?
Are they Barking ?

[overstress]

So as we have it BALPA want 3200 BA pilots to strike over a subsiduary one aircraft outfit that isn't even flying yet and who's terms and conditions won't affect any pilot presently flying within mainline BA?
Are they Barking ?

Thereby demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the facts as they stand and also the wider implications for the global pilot market...

...but we know you are only winding us up, Norm! :E:E

[pacamack]

Surely if the prospects of a mertitocratic organisation with difficult schedules and fairly average T&Cs are so abhorrent to pilots then OS will be unable to recruit sufficient numbers of pilots to operate and your problem will go away?

[Phil.Capron]

Best of luck to you during this dispute.Someone once said there was no present or future only the past repeating itself.OS reminds me of an airline acquisition that BA undertook in 1992(?).For them industrially it was a train crash and they caved in big time.Can anyone remember the airline?Answers on a postcard........

[courtney]

Arthur Scargill would be proud, so reminiscent of the Miners, Dockers, Fleet St printers, car workers, ludites…….

[Hand Solo]

There are two d's in luddite.

[Flap 80]

Phil.C Nice to hear from you again...How is retirement? I hardly think that the OS situation and the 1992 situation attract any comparisons. I will never forget Ms L T raising her hand at the ADC in Swindon 1993 (?) to be one of the few people voting AGAINST the DA pilots being allowed to have reinstatement within BA. I do not recall BALPA offering one iota of assistance to those redundant and being left with much embarrassing "egg on the face" when the Croydon IT result was known!! The M&S vouchers from the BA members were much appreciated however. You need to realise that PTSD is not only a result of combat in Iraq.

[courtney]

Thank you Hand Solo, I would expect you to know!

[SR71]

I've never believed that everyone aspires to BA, but for as long as somebody else pays more people will leave and employers feel the upward pressure on T&Cs. Once the top tier starts to come down that pressure on employers eases and it's not good for pilots.


BA pilots protecting their own turf is emminently reasonable. We'd all do the same. I would.

But the belief that OpenLies T&C's will exert downward pressure on T&C's outside the organization is a little deluded IMHO.

The only UK organization that benchmarks against BA is probably VS, and BA certainly don't benchmark against RYR.

Have you seen what those guys work for (inspite of their ridiculous claims at the top of this WWW site)?

It couldn't get any worse...

OpenLies will, however, exert catastrophic downward pressure on your T&C's if you don't secure the critical point you are contesting.

So while your altruism on behalf of the "rest of us" is appreciated, bearing in mind your vanguard status, honestly, this isn't about "us" is it?

But then, as has been mentioned on this thread numerous times, you already know that.

Best of luck.

;)

[Phil.Capron]

Hi Flap 80!
My comparison with '92 was along the lines of a vote for industrial action to ensure that those DA pilots that were "joining BA" were on a BA contract.You're right though in the sense that it was not possible to sort out the whole mess but there definitely was a victory in there somewhere.
ATB.

[M.Mouse]

Arthur Scargill would be proud, so reminiscent of the Miners, Dockers, Fleet St printers, car workers, ludites…….

If that is the level of your ability to present a reasoned argument explaining why we are wrong or mis-guided then I despair.

[Human Factor]

bluepilot,

Thanks for your support. It is much appreciated.

.... but BALPA as a UNION .... needs to support not just you guys but the minority as well....

BA guys are the minority (less than half the BALPA membership).;)

In this case though, BALPA (and more specifically the BACC) are supporting the non-BA guys as well. Anyone who joins OS after a successful action will, if they choose to bid across to BA mainline, benefit from the higher terms and conditions that we are so keen to protect.

[PC767]

BA cabin crew here and as my uion has total missed the ball on this my involvement is now supportive of my flight deck colleagues and general interest.

It seems that AMR has decided to off load American Eagle. Wonder what happens to the crew? Under the Balpa proposals, should this occur with OpenSkies then the crew would be protected. And lets be honest BA does not have a good track record managing subsidarys. And then flogging them.

http://news.briefing.com/GeneralContent/Investor/Active/ArticlePopup/ArticlePopup.aspx?ArticleId=NS20080116101739HeadlineHits

Good Luck.

[bluepilot]

what i meant by supporting the minority is for example;

Instead of just allocating commands in GSS cargo operation why dont you work with the pilots already there to get them onto the BA list so you work together?

Why didnt you support the BACON cc drive in getting a mainline seniority number (pilot merger)?

do you really give a flying stuff about the pilots already recruited by openskys? A friend of mine has been recruited (and it was before a ban!) and has sent me details of a Q and A document from openskys... i quote:

OpenSkies have made an offer to BALPA to represent Openskies pilots and establish an OpenSkies Company Council. BALPA have not yet responded to our offer.
It is our intention to review salary on an annual basis.

therefore BALPA are once again on a one way street here!! have the openskys pilots ( very few maybe) been consulted??? i think not!

[Hand Solo]

Instead of just allocating commands in GSS cargo operation why dont you work with the pilots already there to get them onto the BA list so you work together?

We'd like the work in house, but BA don't want it, GSS management don't want it and the GSS pilots do not have BALPA representation. It's a bit difficult trying to force people on to our seniority list if nobody else wants it. GSS is a limited exception, only allowed 4 aircraft. Going all out on strike to force GSS to be amalgamated would be using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. The existing arrangement gave BA, us and GSS something. It was a compromise solution.

Why didnt you support the BACON cc drive in getting a mainline seniority number (pilot merger)?

We did. We used the leverage we had in the RJ100 fleet handover to force BA to agree to put the CX RJ pilots on our seniority list. It was the CX company council how turned the offer down.

do you really give a flying stuff about the pilots already recruited by openskys?

Yes, but if it comes down to them or me then I choose me. Tell me you'd do otherwise.

OpenSkies have made an offer to BALPA to represent Openskies pilots and establish an OpenSkies Company Council. BALPA have not yet responded to our offer.

That is a non-issue. BALPA were invited to represent OS pilots from the word go and there has never been any debate that BALPA would be recognisd there. That sounds like some BA management spin as OS is not being stonewalled by BALPA. However it is hard to have representation in an airline that does not yet exist and has no pilots, aircraft or routes to speak of.

therefore BALPA are once again on a one way street here!! have the openskys pilots ( very few maybe) been consulted??? i think not!

Caveat emptor. If you sign up to a company in the middle of a large industrial dispute then you can expect life to be complicated. Whether or not the OS pilots have BALPA representation is irrelevant to the ongoing dispute between BA and the BA Company Council.

[bluepilot]

Dear mr solo, as others have said here you seem to have an answer to everything. I must point out..... the BACON pilot issue was a non starter, if BA offered a settlement to BA 757/767 pilots only in any dispute you would probably be the first to cry that we must stick together, this is exactly what happened at BACON. you made an offer to only a part of the workforce (RJ100 Pilots only), the BACON cc had no choice but to reject the offer as the pilot force must stick together. The offer you made was near as damn it worthless. BUT did you realise the concequences of these actions? the ex Airuk / KLMuk pilots were involved in a bitter dispute with KLM over discrimination etc. The managment there simple said "look in your own back yard at BA and BACON", made our fight even harder!!!

As I have said I really do support you guys , but please stop this fortress BA. As many of you have said BA lead the T and C for the UK. Now if you were to insist that the BA Cityflyer pilots should be bought into the BA fold as well as the OS pilots THEN you would be shouting a far more credible cry. As it is you look as if you are cherry picking which will damage you in the future.

[747-436]

Although I am not a BA pilot or a pilot I have been following this thread with interest and listening to the Podcasts over at BA Plane BA Pilot to get an idea of BALPA's side of things.

On a side issue but perhaps relevant to this dispute, a guy from American Airlines on the podcasts said that the American Unions got their fingers burnt by letting AA hive off some work to a smaller carrier which has now grown to about 300 aircraft across the USA. He made the point that open skies could do the same thing. A point that I think he didn't mention was that AA would not be able to do these routes effectivly and compete with the Southwests of this world as their costbase is too high. Is BA trying to do the same to pre empt a low cost long haul carrier from doing this out of Europe??

[Human Factor]

Is BA trying to do the same to pre empt a low cost long haul carrier from doing this out of Europe??

Perhaps. It would make a certain element of business sense. Both sides acknowledge that this would be unworkable using Bidline Rules as costs could become prohibitive. Similar to the LGW shorthaul operation. In fact, BALPA have effectively conceded to any T&Cs that BA want in exchange for OS pilots to be on the seniority list. This would negate any cost disadvantage immediately.

The question you need to ask though is this one.

If BALPA is prepared to concede to any terms and conditions desired by BA to allow Open Skies to operate at the initial cost base planned by BA, why will BA not permit OS pilots to join the mainline seniority list?

No-one in BA, not even WW, is prepared to give an answer.

[Hand Solo]

the BACON pilot issue was a non starter-----this is exactly what happened at BACON. you made an offer to only a part of the workforce (RJ100 Pilots only), the BACON cc had no choice but to reject the offer as the pilot force must stick together. The offer you made was near as damn it worthless.

Thats a rather naive viewpoint. Full access to the BA seniority list from BACX pilots would never have been tolerated by BA. The BACCs mandate was to protect the interests of BA pilots, nobody else. The transfer of the RJs broke our Scope agreement and as such the BACC had some bargaining power with BA, firstly to secure secondee positions for us, secondly to secure access to the BA list for the RJ pilots. If you think they ever had it within their gift to gain access to all BACX pilots then you are dreaming. It was a quid pro quo - the RJ was the only fleet with secondees so only the RJ fleet got the mainline seniority. The rather naive BACX CC thought that if they stamped their feet and refused to accept seniority for the RJ pilots then the secondments wouldn't happen. I think history is the best judge of how successful they were.


BUT did you realise the concequences of these actions? the ex Airuk / KLMuk pilots were involved in a bitter dispute with KLM over discrimination etc. The managment there simple said "look in your own back yard at BA and BACON", made our fight even harder!!!

Sorry but you can't pin the blame for KLMs actions on BA.

Now if you were to insist that the BA Cityflyer pilots should be bought into the BA fold as well as the OS pilots THEN you would be shouting a far more credible cry.

The strike is not about Open Skies, it is about Schedule K, our Scope agreement. Open Skies breaks it, Cityflyer does not. You cannot take action against a broken agreement if the agreement hasn't been broken. The RJ100 issue was done and dusted with the last scope rewrite.

[pacamack]

Hand Solo, which part of Schedule K does Open Skies break?

[BarbiesBoyfriend]

Hand job

Sorry for thread drift, but do I understamd correctly that BA CityFlyers' 'Scope' clause exemption is just til 2010?

And if so- what then?

And how does that all fit in with the new 318 operation as well as Open Skies?

Oh pleeeeeease let me stay in Scotland!

Ta.

[bluepilot]

Dear Mr Solo,

Sorry you cannot see the wood for the trees, from the tone and the structure of your responses i would hazard a guess you are on the BA CC, as a former CC member of another airline I can understand your line, however intead of just defending every statement verbatum , perhaps you may conceed that others may have a point.

Quote: Sorry but you can't pin the blame for KLMs actions on BA.

Sorry but you really did miss the point!!! It would appear from your response that you really dont give a stuff about ANY pilot force outside BA.



Good luck with your battle.

[Hand Solo]

Pacamack - Open Skies breaks the intent of Schedule K

The intent of this agreement is to promote employment security and
career opportunities for Flight Crew on the British Airways Master
Seniority List (BA Mainline Flight Crew)

BA do not wish to review Schedule K and we are balloting for a strike to force them to.

BB- yes, 2010 is the limit on the RJ100. What happens next is up to BA. They can change the aircraft to sub-100 seats or incorporate the whole operation into Mainline but the current arrangement cannot continue. The new 318 operation falls under Scope and will be flown by mainline pilots.

[Walnut]

People keep posing the question "why is WW so determined not to conceed OS pilots the right to join the mainline seniority list"?

I feel it is quite simple, BA pilots are highly organised with a rostering system "Bidline" which takes roster control away from the management.

For years management (LCG springs to mind) have been trying to disemble Bidline, claiming its costly, in fact it is not, but "They" feel it takes away their right to manage. Macho management hate this.

[pacamack]

So if I understand this correctly BA are not actually breaking Schedule K as it is currently written.

BA pilots are proposing to strike because BA management won't alter an agreement that the Pilot's union had previously negotiated with them?

[Hand Solo]

BA pilots are striking because BA has broken the intent of the agreement. Intent is all important. BA took BALPA to a tribunal last year in order to change our holiday arrangements because they claimed the intent of the agreement allowed them to do so. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. The intent of Schedule K is to ensure BA flying is done by BA pilots. The current agreement only states the UK because that was the only place we could fly from. Now we can fly from the EEA and we want the agreement changed to reflect that.

[blimey]

pacamack (7*1***?)

BA pilots are proposing to strike because BA management won't alter an agreement that the Pilot's union had previously negotiated with them?

Yes, things move on, and previous negotiations are rendered irrelevant.

[Hand Solo]

bluepilot - Never been on the BACC, have no desire to do so, and I certainly can see the wood for the trees. Your claim thus:

It would appear from your response that you really dont give a stuff about ANY pilot force outside BA.

is untrue, but if it comes to a choice of them or me then tell me, would you honestly choose others over yourself? All the arguments put forward against BA boil down to "Come on, give them a bit of your work, you've got loads". Whether it's flying 744Fs from STN, RJ100s from BHX and MAN, or 757s from BRU or CDG, this is all work that is generated solely by BA and should be flown by BA pilots. If you give a little bit, give a little bit, give a little bit more, you suddenly find you've got nothing left. So, excuse me if I appear unsympathetic to causes occasionally but if those causes are attempts to move work away from mainline to another operator then they'll get short shrift from me. Charity begins at home.

[bluepilot]

:ugh::ugh::ugh:

And if you bring those pilots into your fold you become stronger and you would not have this problem with openskys.

"charity begins at home"

my god...... i was a supporter of your cause, your selfish arrogant attitude is quickly pushing me the other way!!

Simply unbelievable :yuk:

[Hand Solo]

Alternatively we could have taken a harder line. We could have strangled GSS at birth but what purpose would that have served? Lost money for BA Cargo and no jobs at all for the current GSS pilots. Of course will you ever hear the BACC praised by GSS pilots for the pragmatism which means that they have jobs? Of course not, they'll just whinge about secondees taking their commands.

What about the BACX RJ issue? Had BALPA been minded they could have refused point blank to allow the transfer of 160 jobs out of mainline, but a strike in the difficult economic climate after 9/11 could have sent BA under so a compromise was reached and BACX got another 130 jobs. Did you ever hear a good word said about that? Of course not, you just got a load of whinging from BACX pilots claiming secondees had stolen 'their' commands. They never seemed to mention the 130 guys at the bottom of their seniority list who were only in continued employment because of the RJ lifeline.

You want us to bring other pilots into the fold, like Cityflyer Do you accept that there has to be a line drawn somewhere with regard to aircraft size and scope? For whatever reasons that line was drawn at 100 seats. Anything above that is BA mainline work and if BA want to set up a parallel operation then they have to bring that into the fold too. Anything below 100 seats and BA can do with it as they will. That is where the line was drawn, or do you think we should go back to BA and say sorry we want everything down to 50 seats now? If you were a CC member then you will know that you can't simply go around levelling demands at the management and hoping they give in. Even if they were minded to change the agreement, which BA most certainly are not, they'd want a big give from us. Do we demand BA move now, with sacrifices from us, or do we wait two years until BA are compelled to move? If you were a union rep what would you do?

[Shark Slayer]

HS not true.
BACX did not hire 130 pilots, they just did'nt have to fire 130 pilots.
BACX scaled down the Dash 8 fleet and got rid of the J 41 and ATP fleets and thats essentially where the pilots for the RJ came from.
All imposed by our masters at BA, they knew best-Right!

Anyway back to the thread, its simple to me; BA want to hire cheaper pilots to fly the pond and Nigel and Rodney are not best pleased.
I for one cant say that I blame them.

BTW, are any of the losers who ran BACX involved with OS? If so dont worry, they'll soon stuff it up!

[pacamack]

So the BA pilots union didn't have the foresight to negotiate an agreement that would cover all BA operations any where in the world. BA pilots are now threatening to go on strike because this agreement no longer suits them and the BA management wont go back and correct the union's original mistake?

Sounds like a worthy cause.

If OS is like any venture I've ever known then it will have been set up with venture capital supplied by BA. The cost of this capital to OS will probably be around 12%. The aircraft will be leased by OS at market rates, seconded staff will be paid for by OS at market rates, services provided by BA will be contracted at market rates etc.
BA are investing their money to make a return, as all companies do. How do you think the BA pension fund is able to support its members? You don't see BA accountants demanding jobs in FS providers that BA has invested in?

[bullshot]

I would have some respect for the Hand Solo & Chums position if they insisted that Openskies is part of BA & therefore only BA pilots should operate it - on current BA terms & conditions. All Openskies pilots would thus belong to BA entirely and would in no way be poor relations.
But it is not like that is it? What you guys want is access to Openskies Commands which would benefit some of you - the minority - but you are quite prepared to make the 'compromise' that the poor old Openskies F/O's will be joining on inferior T&C's. But 'allowing' them a position on the BA seniority list will be recompensation for inferior T&C's to you! BFD!!
I find your 'I'm allright Jack' attitude despicable and I resent you using my association for such a selfish enterprise. You do not have my support.

[stroppy jock]

The demand for OS pilots being on the MSL is not intended as a compensation for their lower Ts&Cs, those Ts&Cs would be applied regardless of being on or off the BA MSL.

The demand for the joint seniority is intended to stop those Pilots in OS from being used as a lever to undermine the Ts&Cs of mainline BA Pilots (and effectively all other Pilots in the UK) - it is demanded as it already is an integral part of the intent of our agreements with BA.

"So the BA pilots union didn't have the foresight to negotiate an agreement that would cover all BA operations any where in the world. BA pilots are now threatening to go on strike because this agreement no longer suits them and the BA management wont go back and correct the union's original mistake?"

The opening line of the agreement states that the intent is that BA pilots will fly BA aircraft - does that not cover OS?

".. seconded staff will be paid for by OS at market rates, "

actually, the seconded managers are not taking pay cuts to set up OS.

[pacamack]

So under Schedule K BA pilots have the right to fly any aircraft that was ever part of the BA fleet, that doesn't sound right?

[stroppy jock]

"BA pilots have the right to fly any aircraft that was ever part of the BA fleet" That is not what is being said. Nobody is refering to a/c which were once owned by BA. OS is a wholey [?] owned subsidiary which will be flying BA owned a/c.

2 quotes from schedule K - our agreement with BA.

"The intent of this agreement is to promote employment security and
career opportunities for Flight Crew on the British Airways Master
Seniority List (BA Mainline Flight Crew). This agreement seeks to
take account of the concerns that the Association has in respect of
employment security and career development whilst not impeding
the commercial development of British Airways plc."

" This is irrespective of whether operating under the mainline BA AOC or that
of any of it’s subsidiaries."

That is the intent to which BA signed agreement. BA has since fought hard to insist that the "intent" of agreements" supersedes any subsequent specific text.

So if BA own the a/c - which they do in OS, or are operating them under a subsidiaries AOC - which I believe they will be doing in OS - then the pilots should be on the MSL - that was BA's agreement & intent then and should be now.

There are some specific exemptions for a/c which are certified under 100 seats - but they are not relevant to OS.

I hope that sounds right, cos it is what BA agreed. :ok:

[LHR747]

Dear Pprune members,

A number of interesting points have been raised over the past three weeks on this forum regarding the BALPA initiated strike ballot in British Airways. It is interesting to note that the vast majority of members appear to be at odds with the stated intention of their trade union. BALPA’s General Secretary has stated quite unequivocally that the strike ballot is “not about money; and it is not about safety”. This is quite clearly not the opinion of the vast majority of the Union’s own members. How might you ask has this disconnect between the Trade union and its members arisen?

The answer is simple. BALPA’s General Secretary issued the following two statements. The first on 9th January where he stated that BA’s “pilots do not want to see its brand or its safety record put at risk” and then on 21 January “BA’s real aim…will eventually force down BA pilot conditions”. So there you have it, the problem is solved. The General Secretary’s muddle headed response to his own statements. This does however leave BALPA’s members in a rather invidious position. Each of BA’s pilots pays between £400 and £1000 per year in union dues. For this they clearly deserve better from their leadership if they are to confront their employer in the crudest manner possible, namely, by withdrawing their labour.

Regards

LHR747

[MrBunker]

Oh good,

The mis-manager's back on the forum.


For what it's worth I'm more than happy with BALPA's leadership on this matter and am happy to heed their warnings. No-one wins if BA gets OS through in this form and with Schedule K intact.

[stroppy jock]

BA "initiated" the move towards a strike ballot by withdrawing from negotiations, BA can halt the progress towards a stoppage by re-opening meaningful negotiations and being willing to actually negotiate rather than dictate terms, and by being willing to abide by the intent of its own agreements.

Sadly you are believing too much of your own "crapoganda" if you think BA pilots do not understand what this is about.

ps havent you got some admin to catch up on...:=

Sir, you are a "busted flush" :{

[Hotel Mode]

Just to remind everyone that LHR747 is the BA manager who tried to run 3 accounts all agreeing with himself earlier in the thread and got deleted for his trouble.

Remind me which side called off the standing conference making the withdrawal of labour inevitable?

[idol detent]

This is quite clearly not the opinion of the vast majority of the Union’s own members. How might you ask has this disconnect between the Trade union and its members arisen?

In your opinion LHR747. In my opinion there is no 'disconnect', as you will find out on the 20th....

The only muddle headed thinking is from BA management who think that they can spin/lie/pull the wool over our eyes in to believing that this is a small, unthreatening niche operation. :mad:

[stroppy jock]

Just to point out that even tho Hotel Mode & I may agree with each other, we are not BA managers and are not the same person... :)

It does worry me that a BA manager can be so stupid as to try to fool us with 3 different persona's on this forum - I am truly disappointed in you and can only hope that the people who really run our airline are a lot smarter and more honest, but I have my doubts...

[biddedout]

Hand solo,

After 5 years under BA mismanagement, no one from BACON would now fail to understand why you are going down this road, but calling the BACON reps naïve is rather patronising. What some BA reps and in particular RH didn’t seem to understand or acknowledge at the time was that BACON was a collection of smaller companies from all sorts of backgrounds, some unionised and others just crawling out of the benevolent mill owner culture. We had only just gained recognition, membership levels weren’t high and we had a bunch of BA Managers parachuted in spinning for England with one major aim, to destroy BALPA within BACON.

The offer of seats on the RJ from the BACC with promises that this was just a foot in the door appealed to some (RJ FO’s mainly), but the vast majority of RJ Captains had little interest in going into Mainline. The CC would have been slaughtered if they had gone for a deal which only benefited a small proportion of the workforce. Clearly, the foot in the door and promises of more jam tomorrow would have come to nothing. It would have been a bit like BA saying we will open up the pension scheme again, but only for ex Concorde and Tristar pilots. Can’t imagine the rest of the BA pilots being impressed by that sort of deal. The CC received very little criticism from within apart from one or two FO’s who were probably more interested in their own desire to get into BA than for the collective good. Membership levels increased from that point onwards.

As for the creation of 130 jobs, not strictly true. The original plan was for 60 secondees LHS RJ and only a few commands for BACON. With pilot turnover in BACON so high 20%+, and with 30 BA cadets on our books ready for return, there were ways of reducing the impact of Beeching-Evan’s rapidly expanding base closing program. If we had actually got to the point where BACON had to announce pilot redundancies rather than just fudging the issue, then the Seconded would have gone back anyway and it would have been interesting seeing how BA dealt with making redundancies in one part of the group whilst recruiting into another. Need to consider suitable alternatives etc….

Although many in BACON gradually began to understand the BA management tactics and accepted the point about seconded hanging onto what was originally theirs, like some of the Cabin Crew Unions, BACC and big BALPA could have been a little more proactive in helping deal with Bacon’s base closures by encouraging BA to accept the transfer of pilots into Mainline. All the cabin crew from the closure of GLA, PLH and SOU were offered LHR ahead of external applicants. Why not the pilots?

The biggest issue was dealing with so many demoted Captains due to base closures. Even if the former BAR pilot’s arguments about our work our aircraft had merit, flying former BACON training captains as FO’s in the RHS alongside was far form ideal and shame on BA for setting up such a situation and in particular for constantly using 9/11 as an excuse for absolutely everything.

The fact was that with the exception of a few routes, the loads on the BAR 737’were generally dreadful. We know, we positioned on them. Something had to change and having bought BACON a year earlier, presumably for some logical reason, then BA should have invested in it just like the competition were investing in their own fleets. It turns out that the only form of investment was to bring in 12 RJ’s. Meanwhile, the rest of the fleets were being priced out of the markets through having to pay BA internal rates for mediocre handling and Mainline rates for redeployed Cabin crew. What a disaster.

SO going bck to Citi Flyer MK 2. It is ultimately BA’s responsbility, but through no fault of thier own, these people have an agreement hanging over their heads which in theory could see them out of work in two years. It’s all very well saying that BA will jus have to absorb it into mainline if it doesn’t invest in new equipment, but I think they may need some encouragement in doing this before they cobble together another half baked idea about spinning in off into yet another subsidiary just to get round scope. These people need answers now and it should be sorted out now, alongside OS.

[Human Factor]

Morning LHR747,

Which manager are you today? We've narrowed it down to two. ;)

Would you care to answer the question I posed earlier?

If BALPA is prepared to concede to any terms and conditions desired by BA* to allow Open Skies to operate at the initial cost base planned by BA**, why will BA not permit OS pilots to join the mainline seniority list?


* no bidline and any scheduling agreement BA want.

** BALPA appreciate there may be additional costs associated with pilots on the MSL flying for OS and have agreed to negate those costs. In fact, WW himself has said that he is prepared to allow us full access to OS provided we renegotiate all T&Cs at LHR. I bet he's not intending for those to be improved.:=

So you see, the highlighted sentence indicates entirely what this is about and you wonder why we need to protect ourselves!

Stop being so disingenuous. I look forward to seeing you back on the line in the summer.:E

[SR71]

Looking at the other side of the coin for a second....sacrilege I know.

I have to say that BA are between a rock and a hard place.

Lets say OS gets off the ground with all the pilots on the MSL.

There comes a point where they can neither get new recruits (far-fetched perhaps?), nor does anyone from Mainline wish to fly their a/c....for obvious reasons. (I presume initial recruits will be "OS frozen" for a certain period?)

Will they be able to compel Mainline pilots to fly the a/c?

Yes? No? Not on OS T&C's? On their original T&C's?

So what does this mean for the cost-base of OS?

Fairly obvious why they don't want inclusion on the MSL surely?

Am I missing something?

[Hotel Mode]

Guys i think we're missing the point here..

Its saturday and colin/robin has found the on switch to his computer. Big round of applause please. :D :D :D

[stroppy jock]

"There comes a point where they can neither get new recruits (far-fetched perhaps?), nor does anyone from Mainline wish to fly their a/c....for obvious reasons. ... "

Why would they not be able to get recruits if they were paying industry rates?
But if they werent able to recruit then they would either have to stop their expansion or negotiate with balpa or the market to get pilots in.

What difference would being on the MSL make - other than possibly being an incentive to join OS?

IF they cant get new recruits then they need to pay more regardless of them being on the MSL or not.

If they need to post mainline pilots into OS then it must be cos they wish to continue flying their routes - routes on which they must be making money or they wouldnt wish to keep flying them. They then have the choice of raising starter rates into OS or paying Mainline guys to do it - at least with joint seniority they have that option.

Should we call him "Glodon" or "Cobin" :confused:

[Hotel Mode]

There comes a point where they can neither get new recruits (far-fetched perhaps?), nor does anyone from Mainline wish to fly their a/c....for obvious reasons. (I presume initial recruits will be "OS frozen" for a certain period?)

Its actually possible that being on the MSL will save BA money as the young fos will join with the promise of jam tomorrow on a mainline fleet, and there'll always be some guys in BA who want an early command esp with a european base. As a separate entity it will have to compete fully with the competition.

[MrBunker]

Those of a conspiratorial nature might wish to look on the BA forum and see which manager has posted on there about the same time this morning! ;)

[Hand Solo]

BACX did not hire 130 pilots, they just did'nt have to fire 130 pilots

Thats just a different side of the same coin to me Shark. The nub of it is that BACX were contracting and without the RJ's they'd probably have had to lay people off, which I'm sure we both agree is a bad thing.

So the BA pilots union didn't have the foresight to negotiate an agreement that would cover all BA operations any where in the world. BA pilots are now threatening to go on strike because this agreement no longer suits them and the BA management wont go back and correct the union's original mistake?

Genius! I'm sure you thought you were being cunning asking the leading questions about Schedule K and then expressing surprise at the motivation behind the strike. Well sorry but we've all seen where you were going with that, and if you'd even bothered to read and digest the whole of the thread you'd know the issues. So just for you, here's an extract from agreement:

"In addition,the actual deployment of aircraft and crews will be subject to
retrospective review."

BA won't review, they've broken the agreement. Are you less confused now?

I would have some respect for the Hand Solo & Chums position if they insisted that Openskies is part of BA & therefore only BA pilots should operate it - on current BA terms & conditions. All Openskies pilots would thus belong to BA entirely and would in no way be poor relations.
But it is not like that is it? What you guys want is access to Openskies Commands which would benefit some of you - the minority - but you are quite prepared to make the 'compromise' that the poor old Openskies F/O's will be joining on inferior T&C's. But 'allowing' them a position on the BA seniority list will be recompensation for inferior T&C's to you!

What, you mean inferior T&Cs just like occurred within BA at LGW, the Highlands and the Regions? There's plenty of precedent there and attempting to impose the costs of highly profitable mainline LHR on bases that run on much tighter margins is commercial suicide that leads to no jobs for anyone. Would you rather BALPA compromised on pay to allow the operation to get off the ground, ratcheting up the terms later, or demand top whack BA pay from the outset and have BA can the project as too expensive? You haven't really thought out your argument there have you?

BACC and big BALPA could have been a little more proactive in helping deal with Bacon’s base closures by encouraging BA to accept the transfer of pilots into Mainline

Encouraging is the key word here. BACC and big BALPA can encourage all they want, but that's all they can do. It's BA's trainset and if BA don't want the CX guys to join then the BACC can't do anything about it. To do so would be secondary industrial action and BA would have BALPA in court in a flash.

I tend to disagree with you about the usefulnes of having the CX RJ drivers on the MSL. Yes you can describe at as foot in the door, jam tomorrow etc etc, but it was jam today. There were far less than 60 secondees and the BA cadets were not on the RJ. Thats 130 BACX drivers with access to the MSL. Isn't something better than nothing? Had the offer been accepted then todays Cityfler issue would most likely not exists. Perhaps it will all be sorted out in the wash up of the current dispute but knowing the way BA management work they'll hang on to the excuse of the operation being commercially uncertain as long as they can.

[Hand Solo]

Good Morning LHR747, today you get a whole point by point rebuttal from me so you can cascade it back up the management chain!

It is interesting to note that the vast majority of members appear to be at odds with the stated intention of their trade union.

No, they are not.

BALPA’s General Secretary has stated quite unequivocally that the strike ballot is “not about money; and it is not about safety”. This is quite clearly not the opinion of the vast majority of the Union’s own members.

Yes it is. The strike ballot is about BA breaching the intent of Schedule K. It's not about money, it's not about safety and it's not about respect. It's about the intent of Schedule K and everybody except the management is very clear about that.

How might you ask has this disconnect between the Trade union and its members arisen?

I might not ask as clearly the disconnect is between managers and their staff, not the union and their members. 13 pilots attended the Flight Ops forum, 300+ went to the BALPA one. Who has the disconnect?

BALPA’s General Secretary issued the following two statements. The first on 9th January where he stated that BA’s “pilots do not want to see its brand or its safety record put at risk” and then on 21 January “BA’s real aim…will eventually force down BA pilot conditions”. So there you have it, the problem is solved.

Frankly I can't disagree with either of those statements, the latter of which is entirely true. However you seem unable to make the distinction between cause and effect. The effect will be to force down BA conditions. The cause is the failure of BA to review Schedule K. Not being versed in the black arts of BA management I much prefer to treat the cause rather than firefight the effect. Thats why we are balloting over schedule K.

The General Secretary’s muddle headed response to his own statements.

Nobodys perfect, not even you. The GS is a figurehead there to rally the troops and provide moral support. The strike is led by the BACC and that's who we follow.

This does however leave BALPA’s members in a rather invidious position. Each of BA’s pilots pays between £400 and £1000 per year in union dues.For this they clearly deserve better from their leadership if they are to confront their employer in the crudest manner possible, namely, by withdrawing their labour.


I lose more than that to BA each year in lateness credit and yet am presented with no leadership whatsoever from our management. I'll stick to BALPA any day. Now if you want to avoid a crude confrontation then the door to the negotiating room is still open. Perhaps you should ask your crude managers why they don't wish to negotiate any more?
Regards

PS Ref MrBunkers previous post, it could well be NP, but also I've seen 'Jonerators ON' posting at the same time as LHR747. Wouldn't take a great leap of the imagination to think that they've set up a single profile and there is a duty management stooge each day. It's just a pity they can't find a competent one.

[biddedout]

Hand Solo,

I don’t think we disagree on many things, and I admire your enthusiastic posting, but I just think that BACC preventing x amount of job losses is a slightly simplistic way of looking at it. Throughout the rundown of BACX, BA were clearly desperate to avoid announcing official pilot redundancies. Not because they cared I suspect, but because they feared the bad publicity that it would bring. If they had, then they would have been into a consultation process to mitigate the effects. They could have claimed "subsidiary noting to do with us, clear blue water" all they wanted, but we rather suspected that the courts would not have seen it that way and that they would have been forced to suspend recruitment until all displaced were found new positions.

After all, it’s no different to a major car plan closing. If there are jobs elsewhere at another plant, then the company would be expected to absorb as many job losses as possible for people with the appropriate experience and qualifications. If extra training was required, then it would have to be provided.

BA cannot get round basic employment laws unless it sells an operation – which it did. Likewise, I guess it could have sold BAR.

What really annoys me is the fact that by law, BA and all airlines are required and encouraged to teach and foster a culture of good CRM and TRM. Since they don’t appear to embrace any of these principles in the way in which they deal with staff, why don’t they just cancel CRM training for good and save a load more cash.

The principles of CRM / TRM are meant to create a situation where a Flight Deck is manned by reasonably happy bunnies. Some of these RJ pilots are on their third base move in five years, all because of internal company politics. Come on BA, sort it out once and for all, telling them that you should be thankful that you have a job is not really good enough.

Care to comment duty stooge? Colin?

[pacamack]

I'm sorry Hand Solo, "review" does not mean "concede". I still can't see any breach to the agreement?

[Hand Solo]

biddedout - I would certainly hope to see the RJ saga sorted out once and for all with the forthcoming shake out, we can only keep our fingers crossed. Whatever happens the whole event is a sorry illustration of what can happen when pilot bodies have to fit amongst themselves for work.

pacamack - conceptually it's no different to striking for a pay rise. BA will still be paying us, we just disagree over how much and so a strike occurs. We think BA has broken the intent of Schedule K. They disagree. We strike until they return to the negotiating table with an offer we can accept. But for your sake I'll give it one last simple explanation. The intent of the agreement is to protect BA jobs and ensure that all flying of aircraft above 100 seats owned by BA will be done by BA pilots. The intent at the time of agreement was that the agreement should apply wherever BA pilots have the right to work. BA are now using the new regulatory environment to set up a wholly owned airline using +100 seat aircrafts operating from bases where we have the right to work. The intent of the agreement has been broken and we will strike until the intent of the agreement is honoured. If you still claim not to get it then I suspect you don't actually want to get it at all, you are just here to make mischief.

[pacamack]

I disagree with your point of view, that doesn't mean I haven't "bothered" to read all of the previous posts (which I have, each and every one of them).

You intend to strike until BA concedes to your terms, that does not constitute any form of negotiation, whether conducted around a table or not.

You can talk all you like about intent, but the Schedule K agreement does not cover direct flights from the US to mainland Europe and BA are under no obligation to alter it so that it does.

You are holding the BA management, and all of BA's customers and other staff, to ransom.

[Shaka Zulu]

@Pacamack, very interesting you should say that. Because it was BA that CLOSED the standing conference that led up to the exhaustion of all negotiations....

We've conceded to many of the terms BA require to make the business succesful.
Lower T&C's, no bidline etc etc Everything required to give it a cost base that matches BA's desire...
Any other costs, like training etc is largely irrelevant. We have our OWN training facility.

It's also funny that BA argued the toss about the 'intent' of a certain work coverage rule, Net Low Bidding. They said we were mis-using that rule. Note, the rule was there but the intent was looked at and so changed!

So the MAIN question is, directly put to Willie Walsh I might add:
If we can match point for point the costbase required by BA then can we put those OS pilots on the Mainline Seniority List.
Answer: No

Is it about cost then or a leverage tool?

[Human Factor]

pacamack,

You intend to strike until BA concedes to your terms, that does not constitute any form of negotiation, whether conducted around a table or not.

The reason we are intending to strike is because negotiations failed. BA pulled the plug without an agreement being reached. BALPA explored every avenue to get a solution without having to call for Industrial Action. BA weren't interested.

You can talk all you like about intent, but the Schedule K agreement does not cover direct flights from the US to mainland Europe and BA are under no obligation to alter it so that it does.

Schedule K specifically states it's intent that it is to secure all BA flying for BA mainline pilots (someone may post a direct quote from it if you're lucky). You are correct in that it does not specifically cover direct flights from the US to mainland Europe. When Schedule K was written, it was illegal for BA do this flying due to the treaties in force at the time so it was irrelevant. The treaties have changed and BA are rightly trying to take advantage of that.

Why is it wrong for BALPA and the BA pilots not to take advantage of it as well?

[pacamack]

From what I have read across all of the posts in this thread the negotiations have broken down over the issue of the master seniority list. BA Pilots want OS to be part of the list, BA don't.

From what I can see on the OS website, OS want to establish a meritocratic culture across the new company, including the pilots. This can't be done if they are part of the master seniority. This arrangement would give pilots from mainline priority over other pilots in OS for command positions, based on the likelihood that mainline pilots would have greater seniority.

OS are happy to take on pilots from mainline but they must compete for positions on equal terms with other applicants. What is wrong with that?

[Re-Heat]

What is wrong with it is - although I disagree with seniority lists - that FOs in BA may be waiting up to 15 years for commands in the present organisation. The labour force logically does not want to become a stale part of the organisation that will surely grow rapidly outside London if OS is a success. The labour force therefore want access to that growth for their future - which includes command opportunity and the chance to work outside London for a while.

Something along the lines of what I wrote a hundred or so posts back, along with the associated cost I mentioned.

[pacamack]

There is nothing to stop BA mainline pilots applying for posts and commands within OS. From what I've read, their seniority and benefits would be protected if they were to move across.

[Hand Solo]

Except it would only be on airframe numbers 2 to 6, subject to a satisfactory interview and limited to 20% of FO positions and 50% of Captain positions. Doesn't sound like a good deal when you say it like that does it?

[Walnut]

I thought this may interest some Balpa members, (I am still a member incidently). About 6 months ago I was approached to apply for Project Lauren. I was interested, & although I have been retired for about 4 1/2yrs, after 34yrs of flying and 20,00hrs one never really gets flying out of ones system. The contact said I could work part time and be based in Paris or Brussels. I was accepted at the initial stage as I still had 757s on my licence. HOWEVER.
When we got to the next stage I was told part time was no longer available & the terms effectively said I would have to fly 6 round trip trans-atlantic trips per month. Also the base could be changed at one months notice at my expense. Suddenly I realised this management could not be trusted.
I went no further.
As I said in an earlier post this operation is nothing but a low cost operation. It is physically impossible to fly 6 NTLs pm long term and as such I believe this operation will be dangerous.
My contact who is still a friend is still in (he has had a ruinious divorce) but has said the start date is slipping. BA were originally going to use ex Iberia 757s for an earlier start, however because the airline had not used them on ETOPs, the CAA refused BA the licence to use these a/c. So instead BA a/c have to be used, which are not really available. Seats are currently the problem, but I am sure BA will get round this one. PL currently has 12 type rated 757 pilots on its books but as to their provence who knows.
People who sign up to this outfit will undoubtably get plenty of hours, but who will train & check them and under whose AOC they operate god only knows.

[stroppy jock]

"From what I've read, their seniority and benefits would be protected if they were to move across."

BA pilots moving to OS under the present offer would lose some pension and not have their benefits protected. They would not be allowed to move across on mainline scales.

Afaik, Under Balpa's proposals they would keep their pension benefits but would have to accept OS pay & rostering - that would mean that few BA pilts would move across unless it was to take a command at a lower pay rate than they would get from BA. Apart from the command course and possible conversion they would not cost more than a direct entry command.

But it could all be negotiated if BA was willing to negotiate, which they arent.

[MrBunker]

Hand,

Could have been SH posting as well at the time.

PS Jonerators. Love it!

All,

This is not about us sulking about not having all the flying jobs in OS. In all truth as BALPA have agreed to the lower T and Cs of OS most BA pilots (very fortuitously, I grant you) would take a net loss by moving to OS. This is about rewriting our scope agreement to take account of the latest legislation recently enacted. Indeed, the actual ballot is not about OS specifically in any single way. It is about ensuring that Schedule K (our scope agreement) is fit for purpose in the new regulatory environment.

The reason we want all OS pilots on the MSL is to ensure that, in the long run, we all enjoy the BA pay and conditions. In and of itself, it's of no interest to most of us to have the jobs in OS for ourselves. As and when we sort this fiasco out then the jobs in OS will still, I trust, be there, with the same bloody awful pay for FOs but, and this is a big but, with the future prospect of movement to BA mainline and the opportunities that offers.

I know it's a sheer delight to bash BA pilots but when we've won this battle everyone involved will be in a better position, both BA and OS pilots. Anyone who is hoping to indulge in a little schadenfreude really needs to think what, ultimately, seeing BA pilots destroyed will achieve in the long run for us all. I'd posit it will be just another step on the road to being the bus drivers that all airline management would wish to treat us as.

[Human Factor]

LHR747,

Are you there? I know it's a weekend so there's only a slim chance..... :rolleyes:

You haven't answered my question, old chap. To be fair, I've only asked twice. I'll keep reminding you until I get an answer.

If BALPA is prepared to concede to any terms and conditions and costs for Open Skies, why will BA not permit OS pilots to join the mainline seniority list?

[pacamack]

Human Factor, I think this question has been answered. OS do not want to undermine the meritocratic culture they are trying to establish. Opening up OS to the mainline seniority list would do this.

[Hand Solo]

Tell us Pacamack, what's your stake in this whole shebang? You have only recently registered and the only thread you've posted on in this one. Why are you so interested in whats going on in OS? Have you applied to OS, or perhaps you work for the parent?

[MrBunker]

Packamack, I'd wager it's got nothing whatsoever to do with protecting the meritocratic culture they're trying to establish (if, by meritocratic, you mean selected for promotion on how far you're prepared to toe the management line). To my mind the only answer, and the only reason they're prepared to let an expensive and damaging strike happen is that there are far, far greater savings to be made off the mainline in the future if Schedule K isn't re-written.

[FullWings]

OS do not want to undermine the meritocratic culture they are trying to establish. Opening up OS to the mainline seniority list would do this.
I'm not sure how the two affect each other? Promotion in OS would still depend on shoe albedo/tongue use/service history, whether the person in question was on the BA master list or not?

[stroppy jock]

Just to be absolutely clear - being on the BA MSL would not stop OS being meritocratic within itself and need not incur any additional costs or complexity because Balpa is willing to negotiate those away.

Balpa is willing to ensure there are NO costs involved in putting these guys on the MSL but BA will not negotiate

Why?

The only believable answer is because they want to use OS to under4mine Mainline Terms etc over the next decade.

BA managers still try to persuade us that their guarantees can be trusted when most of us have first hand experience of one or more BA managers not being trustworthy and BA as a whole has shown itself willing & able to ignore such previously given guarantees.

[Jaq]

Everyone here seems to be concerned about OS and seem to be forgetting that Willie has already got a wedge into mainlines T&Cs. It’s called BA Cityflyer.
These guys operate in and out of London and are increasingly taking more and more of LHR’s routes.
Cityflyer pilots earn BA loads of readies and to the best of my knowledge have never been on BA’s seniority list. BALPA, it seems, are blissfully unaware or unconcerned.
Evidence http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3730172&postcount=435
Perhaps BALPA are only worried when ‘Long Haul’ is affected.

Forever cynical

[Hand Solo]

Have you read the full thread Jaq? BALPA are well aware of the existence of Cityflyer, and it's existence is permitted by a clause in the Scope agreement. If you want to know more then read the previous 33 or so pages, no point in us all repeating ourselves. In fact if you'd even read the last 10 pages you'd see a robust debate about Cityflyer Mk2.

[manrow]

Shouldn't this thread rightly be moved to the "Airline Specific Private Forums"?

Other airlines seem to air their dirty laundry there?

[Human Factor]

Shouldn't this thread rightly be moved to the "Airline Specific Private Forums"?

There's one running there already.;)



LHR747,

If BALPA is prepared to concede to any terms and conditions and costs for Open Skies, why will BA not permit OS pilots to join the mainline seniority list?

[Jaq]

Hand Solo, no I didn't read all previous pages. I'm still on page 1522 of War and Peace. I did start to read them but gave up. I will try again.

and it's existence is permitted by a clause in the Scope agreement
If I'm informed correctly I think the scope clause covers aircraft of LESS than 100 seats, or was that mentioned earlier too.

I still think BALPA are only shouting because OS threatens LH.

Now I'll shut up 'till I read earlier posts.

[Hand Solo]

You are incorrectly informed about Scope.

Perhaps you are correct about BALPA.

My view is better late than never. No sense in repeating past mistakes. It's line in the sand time.

[752_driver]

Few questions concerning OS/Strike:


If the disagreement is about schedule K and not OS specifically, then why the recruitment ban by IFALPA?

If OS struggles to recruit sufficient numbers for the 1st aircraft, will
mainline pilots crew the first flights?

How much does a new joiner earn at BA mainline? SFO joining
OS will attract a financial package circ 62K pA. Are we talking just
money when discussing T&C?

How can OS compete and undercut BA mainline if its aircraft never
touch UK soil under existing agreements?

When is the strike ballot result to be made public and when are the
first strike dates?

[Brakes...beer]

To try to summarise the last 33 pages:

OS contravenes the intent of Schedule K by employing non-BA pilots to fly BA work, albeit out of Europe from which BA could not operate when Schedule K was last agreed.

Research the pay yourself, but BA DEPs are slightly better off than that.

OS would take transfer traffic from BA mainline immediately. More importantly, it could draw investment (new aircraft) away from BA mainline and let LHR wither on the vine until expansion there is finally approved in about 2020. Once established as a Trojan horse, OS would be able to act as a strike-buster at LHR on the command of the BA board (current agreements would be swept aside, certainly in the event of a future strike by mainline). Once OS were established, BALPA would be emasculated.

The strike ballot closes on 20 Feb, results announced very shortly thereafter, I should think. Earliest date for industrial action complying with the law is 28 Feb, latest is 19/20 Mar.

[Ancient Observer]

As I've now retired from the Aviation sector, I feel free to comment. The whole set of preserved T & C in the sector, from ATCOs thru to Pilots will be successfully attacked sometime soon by someone. (e.g. Printers, Dockers, Miners etc). Tactically, should our TUs focus on "preserving" what we've got, or working with reasonably sensible employers to develop a more realistic model for to-morrow?
A very difficult decision that requires thought, not knee-jerk reactions.

[Ray D'Avecta]

Ancient Observer,

Tactically, should our TUs focus on "preserving" what we've got, or working with reasonably sensible employers to develop a more realistic model for to-morrow?


:D:D:D

tomorrow gets my vote any day!!!!

[Strepsils]

or working with reasonably sensible employers to develop a more realistic model for to-morrow

Anyone else spot the flaw in this otherwise reasonable plan........

[koi]

Brakes-Beer has hit the point.

Gentlemen, this is a fight that you will not win. Your union,.... the one that treated the Dan Air pilots at EOG so badly will not serve you well. This whole issue is nothing more than nature taking its course. The market always wins as I reminded you earlier. It is almost a pleasure to watch the inevitable, the squealing and moaning. Get the guys who signed on as unemployed B74 drivers on retirement pensions from BA to come over and assist ! Schadenfreude... no.
Koi.

[puddle-jumper2]

Your union,.... the one that treated the Dan Air pilots at EOG so badly

Not half as bad as they treated the rest of the Dan-Air pilots. At least the EOG minority had an offer of employment. The poor majority others (some of which had been BALPA members for over 20 years) were offered jack s:mad:t.

I didn't see anyone shouting 'strike' then :yuk::yuk:

I have nothing against BA pilots protecting what they have - we would all do the same.......but BALPA......that's another story.:ugh:

[fruitbat]

I think people saying this is a battle we can't win is a little wide of the mark. If you're not involved in this process, which is a nasty one and will mean huge sacrifices on everyones part, please have the dignity to keep your views balanced and reasonable.

It is a battle we MUST win and indeed we will. Time will tell, but if you were involved and had seen the arguments for and against, I guarantee you would be doing the same.

[papa2andcharlie]

As someone who's not BA, pilot or management, I feel the tide is turning. The certainty of victory is no longer there.


Are you kidding me? You apparently have no links/ties with airline aviation whatsoever, but somehow BA Pilots should respect/listen to that opinion? You just don't appear qualified to come out with that type of statement.

(Go BALPA/BA Pilots - Boys in green are behind you (!))

[ShortfinalFred]

Koi - I was going to write a reasoned response but why bother, you are just a jerk, a jealous, BA pilot hating jerk. Watch - BALPA will win.

BA think they can win by turning pilots into hate figures within the company who have no authority and no self esteem - result, BA is a chaotic airline with no leadership and p*ss poor prospects. Lost bags anyone?

Now they think they can transpose this model using every Pavel and Ivan with a european license who is willing to chuck their health away on a roster that would kill an elephant in an airline that will be run by dictat and in which they will earn peanuts for slavery. Its laughable.

BALPA will win because, in an almost phyrric vistory, it will be demonstrated that Air France/KLM and Lufthansa will be the winners in the network carrier game. They dont seek to smash pilots as a professional group and have demonstrably better hubs, management and a willingness to grant a shred of dignity to and understanding of front line staff. By the time this becomes glaringly obvious, if it is'nt already, BA will be a collapsed twitching mess with banks wondering how the implosion happened and the usual cast of villains discussing how to flog the dead horse into one more spurt of life. Then along will come a management team with the glaringly obvious insight that airlines are ultimately a service business and, unless you are running a blue-painted cattle truck point to point with no attempt at service, then a service is delivered by people, empowered and treated as such.

By then, hopefully something will be left to salvage. But what of that to you, eh, Koi?

Nothing I'll wager. You'll just sit there and laugh smugly as a British employer self destructs and takes down the livelihoods of thousands of British workers with it. What fun a chat with you across the bar must be. :yuk:

[the heavy heavy]

fred,

spot on!

shall we watch rome burn together because i sure as hell won't be flying.

thh

[ShortfinalFred]

Nor will I!!

[swordsman]

Koi
Dan Air were if I remember bought by BA 1 pound sterling.BALPA membership somewhat less than 100 %.
British Caledonian on the otherhand were bought for a bit more (£ 225 million)
had 100 % BALPA membership and thanks to BALPA were treated very well.Some would argue that their subscriptions are worth every penny.
BALPA will not break ranks on this one.The present BALPA leaders are a formidable bunch.Very intellegent,focused,driven (largely junior) militant and strong leaders.If the current managment at BA want to pick a fight with them then thats up to them.No problem.Reminds me of that character in Monty Python without any arms and legs telling a Knight in armour that he has not finished with him.:)

[puddle-jumper2]

What difference does it make how much the company is sold for or what BALPA membership it has at the time, as long as there was enough to get recognition (which Dan-Air had for a very long time).

BALPA should be there to support ALL it's members equally, regardless of what airline they work for or how much their company is worth.:=

[fruitbat]

It's in the past. BALPA is a very different beast now. The BACC reps are extremely effective and have already sorted out some issues such as pensions and work coverage with a lot of lateral thinking and an intelligent, reasoned approach. They tried this with OS, but BA just refused to listen. It is this fact, and the fact a strike could cost 100's milllions, that makes us all believe there must be a very big prize at stake.....the wholesale destruction of our terms and conditions. And don't believe its just BA that will suffer, Branson won't let his pilots get away with working 750 hrs a year for more money than BA if we lose. This affects everyone in the business. Cheer our potential downfall at your peril.

[old,not bold]

the wholesale destruction of our terms and conditions.

And there I was, thinking it's all about the wholesale destruction of BA. Not my favourite airline, and never has been from the days when it was BOAC or BEA, rotten management then and now, over-staffed, filled with appalling working practices etc etc. And I was recruited into it at the start of my airline career.

Perhaps being destroyed by its pilots is what it deserves. But when that's done intentionally it seems just dumb, like turkeys voting for Christmas.

[ACAV8R]

This whole Open Skies sounds exactly like what Air Canada tried to do by buying Skyservice Airlines, a charter carrier. ACPA put a stop to that pretty quickly and BALPA had better do the same.

Many of AC's domestic routes are now served by AC Jazz, where they used to be flown by AC mainline.

Set the Parking Brakes boys, and don't release them until Open Skies is history.

:D:D to BALPA for their hard-line.

[overstress]

The airline will not be destroyed. It will capitulate to BALPA on the orders of those who hold the purse-strings.

[Autobrake Low]

Its a very sad day indeed when it becomes obvious that the company you are proud to work for has no qualms at all in treating you all like school dunces. I had respect for the management and their role in making BA a success. They must be doing something right as we are making great profits and new aircraft on order and T5 looming ... The pilotworkforce has played their part in that success however. We have shown great flexibility over the years on many issues - and new agreements have been drawn up accordingly. Why then has it come to this today? Is it so necessary for the success of Openskies to have a different pilotworkforce? Answer- No!! As of yet I still wait to hear someone from management tell me how the new airline will fail if they use a common seniority list between the two. Other airlines seem confident of making a success of it. Why not the worlds most profitable?
On a daily basis we undertake great responsibility- with massive consequences if we make mistakes. We work long hours - very frequently above and beyond our remit -at no extra pay!!! -all just to keep the show on the road. That is just what we do. All a bit demoralising when on returning home way into discretion - you find no transport to the carpark - no thanks - and oh yes - disrespectful and unappreciative management demonstrating these traits with an underhand attack on our job security. :=

[Mick Stability]

Everyone loves to hate BA.

But what about when those filthy unloved planes in blue are being flown by ‘Pavel and Ivan’?

How do you think LHR will work then?

You may hate us, but do you really think Heathrow will be just as safe with 3500 strangers?

[Brakes...beer]

Koi,

I'm not sure what point you think I have hit, but you misunderstand me. I was outlining the reasons for the dispute, a dispute I am very confident BALPA will win, and without bankrupting BA.

You appear to belong to the economically semi-literate union-haters who love to quote "the market". Industrial disputes are not always conflicts between Marxist trade unions and brave, clear-sighted, free-market management, which the former are doomed to lose. Looking at recent European pilot strikes, who won at Aer Lingus? At Lufthansa? Has the sky fallen in at those companies?

[koi]

Koi's - history, H*mble, Balpa Rep in the 70s and 80s and independants for 30 yr. Time of my life in the real world. I say again, if you want to see how it should be done then look at the medics and the Royal Colleges method of controlling recruitment, terms, conditions quality and regulation. Untouchable for decades, with government after government unable or unwilling to press the restart button. Airlines are ruled by thugs in suits, they have to be or you simply wouldnt have jobs. With me so far ! That BA pilots have been able to maintain.... what are nothing more than restrictive operating practices for so long is simply unacceptable and a red rag to the industry. Come on fellas, look outside into the other world. I dont like to see folks suffer, but this is long overdue and will become addictive viewing fo many of us. Pass the tissues. Koi needs to wipe away tears.

Koi

[morismarina]

the airline management should be responsible for the loss of profits caused by everybody booking on other carriers. like many times before this could have been averted by talks with the union.

[411A]

Airlines are ruled by thugs in suits, they have to be or you simply wouldnt have jobs. With me so far ! That BA pilots have been able to maintain.... what are nothing more than restrictive operating practices for so long is simply unacceptable and a red rag to the industry

Thugs in suits are very necessary, to ward off even bigger thugs in suits from other carriers and finance groups.
If the BA pilots have never realised this, they are in for a rude awakining.
Imperial Airways died and went to heaven a long time ago.
Airlines are a cut-throat business, make no mistake.

[Stoic]

411A

You stated:
Imperial Airways died and went to heaven a long time ago.Actually not so. On 12 June, 1939 the British Overseas Airways Corporation Ltd Bill was introduced in the House of Commons by Sir Kingsley Wood providing for the merger of Imperial Airways and British Airways Ltd.

BOAC continued until BOAC and BEA were combined to form the modern British Airways in the mid seventies.

There was no death involved.

Regards

Stoic

[Hand Solo]

I say again, if you want to see how it should be done then look at the medics and the Royal Colleges method of controlling recruitment, terms, conditions quality and regulation. Untouchable for decades, with government after government unable or unwilling to press the restart button. Airlines are ruled by thugs in suits, they have to be or you simply wouldnt have jobs. With me so far ! That BA pilots have been able to maintain.... what are nothing more than restrictive operating practices for so long is simply unacceptable and a red rag to the industry.

You seem to be quite willing to level accusations of restrictive operating practices at BA pilots but, like so many other posters, are unwilling to produce actual examples of such practices. Perhaps you, like the others, are simply jumping on the anti-BA bandwagon supported only by years of prejudice and outdated ideas.

By holding up the medics as an example you reveal yourself to have been somewhat detached from the real world for the last 5 years or so. The world has changed since you last looked outside and I doubt you'll find many junior medics sharing your rosy view of the royal colleges.

[idol detent]

KOI said
That BA pilots have been able to maintain.... what are nothing more than restrictive operating practices for so long is simply unacceptable and a red rag to the industry.

...and with that statement you have proved yourself the fool that others suspect you of being. imho.

I am SH and will be close to 800hrs this year. It is nearly impossible to get me to do more hours as I am continually up against FTL limits (ie Scheme, not BLRs). How come I have 'restrictive operating practices' then?

You quite simply have no idea what you are talking about.

BA haters I can understand, but ignorant BA haters? O pleazzze....

Meanwhile, back to the thread :(

[koi]

All
Shall we let nature take its course. The tissues are at the ready. Doesn't the song go 'we didn't start the fire... it was always burning... Bob Aisling was put in place to start the process of breaking the unions. A good start with the cabin crew was made for Willy to finish off. Do your pursers still hail from their lairs in southern spain , fly in to smokie and mince there way around the work place. Who pays for those cheap seats...sorry guys.. no pun intended. Must control costs. Cut staff travel now and allow just 10% discount on full price. Shareholders take note. I do hope that the FO's pay has caught up with the cabin crews and that the ''command bridge ''pay for the long term FO s = no hopers or fleet / base protection players, who will not reach command before retirement ,jumps in decent chunks for the pension calculation. I hope that:
the hundred or more pilots that leave BA each year to persue careers in the big wide world will write an article or two in the Log.
that the young man in charge of cadet recruitment eventually achieves command before retirement.
that they reinstate cheese board and the free use of Latin by senior captains. [ ok just taking the piss] That some of the young turks on a mission in BA ....eventually catch up with us 50 gusting seventies and realise that we have long seen this coming. The market will make a correction.
Tissues please... and be quick.
Koi

[Orion Man]

When is the ballot result due out ?

Good luck all you guys at British Airways. Your management must be brought to its knees over this. It is reminescent of Custer's last stand as far as BALPA is concerned.

If BALPA loses this, there will be a stampede out of the union and we might as well all pack up and go home because the future will be frightening.

Regards

Orion Man

[Hand Solo]

Thanks Orion Man. It does appear that Koi has gone stark raving bonkers, and judging by the comments in his previous post it's obvious that he hasn't seen or heard anything from inside BA for at least the last 5 years.

[Orion Man]

Hmm,

Bizarre ramblings indeed. I Googled and ascertained that the result is due out on the 20th and then a week will elapse before the fun and games begin. I sincerely hope you get an emphatic mandate to stop this assault on industry wide Ts & Cs.

Good luck !!!!!!

[Hand Solo]

Probably about BA requiring pilots for their long haul and short haul fleets. It's just a guess.

[whattimedoweland]

Koi,

I don't know what medication you are on but you may want to return to your doctor to reduce the dosage!!:).

Just a thought!!.:p

WTDWL.

[fruitbat]

Is Koi an anagram for Oik?

[ShortfinalFred]

Koi trained at Hamble, according to his own post, and then, through no fault of his own, was not given a place by BA. It happened to quite a few Hamble graduates, I understand, as BA cut back on recruitment. This must have been a bitter blow and I sympathise, but to turn it into a crusade against BA all these years later is rather sad, as are Koi's rantings about a BA that simply does not exist in the way he sees it. Either way, BALPA will win!

[overstress]

Stand by for any comments on Koi's ramblings to be removed by the moderators, as they did to mine yesterday....

Not much to be said now until the ballot result is announced on the 21st...

[manrow]

I am confused by postings on here.

Has BALPA negotiated on your behalf?

Or do some of you disagree with the view they are putting forward on your behalf?

[idol detent]

BALPA have negotiated nothing. BA said "Take it or leave it" then walked out.

It took BALPA the best part of 6 months to get BA to say anything at all, and what they did say left little room for negotiation, hence the ballot.

You will find out on the 20th/21st just how many disagree with BALPA. I wager it won't be many.....

[Orion Man]

Just spent an hour talking to a couple of BA pilot friends of mine.

You can bet your bottom dollar it won't many.

Regards

Orion Man

[overstress]

BALPA uses an external organisation to poll its members. A bit like getting the destination forecast before departure...

The results of the poll can

a) be very useful in determining likely member response
b) be used to rebuff management claims that BALPA does not speak for its members...

[BA FAIR MANAGER]

This whole saga raises a few queries in my mind...

Where was all the sqwawking for "taking work away from BA" when they set up GO and DBA ??

I don't recall there being a mad rush to be part of those outfits either, so what in your views is different here ??

To the uninitiated, this would suggest there is a pocket lining incentive here ?? Someone please provide the clarity that quoshes this..

I have no doubt that some BA Pilots have been establishing a war chest in prep for a battle with their own company. The question is, do you really think the BA Management team would still be willing to stand toe to toe on this issue, if THEY TOO had not built their own war chest. And whose do you think is bigger...??

Sadly, It's going to be a long winter...

[411A]

Sadly, It's going to be a long winter...

The result may well be...does anyone really care?
Sir Richard must be smiling, same for Sir Michael, and I suspect the European airlines (especially KLM/AirFrance and Lufthansa) must me laughing, all the way to the bank.:ok:

[Orion Man]

To the uninitiated, this would suggest there is a pocket lining incentive here ??

Similar to the sacrifice the pilots have had to make on pensions ?

The result may well be...does anyone really care?


BA shareholders might and the management that has brought the company to the brink certainly will when the resolve of the pilot workforce is comprehended.

Regards

Orion Man

[overstress]

OK, I'll bite... despite Not much to be said now until the ballot result is announced on the 21st... :}

BA FAIR MANAGER - I could believe you were what your handle infers you might be, because your first posting (in this persona :) ) is very similar in style to BA's official comms on this issue:

a) is vindictive and petty
b) does not address the clear, single issue this boils down to
c) is difficult to understand
d) is written from a standpoint of ignorance (have you seen the PL/OS business plan? - No? - nor have BALPA, that's why we're worried)

BA pilots' individual war-chests are irrelevant. BA's war chest could be £350m+ bigger if our management had not squandered it on fines.

So we have a hectoring management paying lip service to modern employment practice (with all the corporate nonsense on the intranet) whilst peddling unclear communications, at the same time refusing to address the single issue of concern raised by BALPA almost 12 months ago.

To the uninitiated, this would suggest there is a pocket lining incentive here ??

The only pockets planned on being lined are those belonging to the management team which stands to benefit from the bonuses expected for setting up a 'double-breasted' operation within BA.

BA pilots will not tolerate being forced to compete for their own jobs.
BA pilots are not afraid to stand up to a bullying, greedy management.

[idol detent]

BA FAIR MANAGER wrote
Where was all the sqwawking for "taking work away from BA" when they set up GO and DBA ??

For reasons that have already been explained. Go back to post number one and READ. It irritates the bejesus out of me when people jump in to a thread without bothering to read from the start. For an apparent BA manager to do the same....well let's just say I'm not surprised.

The best communicators listen (or read) before speaking. You sum up BA management nicely.


....if THEY TOO had not built their own war chest. And whose do you think is bigger...??


And who's war chest will deplete the quickest?

Pathetic.

[Hand Solo]

I think I could probably last about 3 months BA Manager, do you think BA can last that long?

[whattimedoweland]

Rumour and speculation are rife.

Having spoken to many of my flight crew colleagues the talk seems to be of an 'all out' strike with continuous action rather than a series of 1/2 day strikes.The reasoning behind this is that those who have to not report for work would not be the victims of a bullying management team making examples of the ones who have to take the action.

Both Cabin Crew unions are watching this very closely with a view to protecting the job security of it's Cabin Crew!!.

Three ballots for industrial action in just over one year from two groups of non militant workers speaks volumes about our bullish,pig headed management team.This CEO is single minded and arrogant but like those before him he will walk away with his pockets lined and the moral of the staff again in tatters.:mad:

May I wish my flight crew colleagues all the best against the worst management team we have had in many year.Good luck.:ok:

WTDWL.

[overstress]

Rumour and speculation are rife.

Especially on a rumour forum! ;)

Thanks for the message of support, WTDWL - I expect Galley FM is on overtime.... BALPA have their strategy, as does WW...

All will be revealed later this week....

[whattimedoweland]

Overstress thanks for your reply.Need it or not you do have much support from the other side of the door.

Thats why I started the post with 'Rumour and speculation'!!.:p

Would you agree this would be a fair tactic,an all out strike?.

BA FAIR MANAGER,you could be a Cabin Crew manager as your words are just the same as used against cabin crew last year.Usual cheap threats and 'we're bigger than you' attitude.

As for people 'lining their pockets',well I guess that will be you and others in your team,gathered round your 7.30am 'Latte' morning,working out how much you will get and your next step up the ladder should you win!!.

I sincerely hope our pilots,professionally led by BALPA teach you and W.W. a good lesson.

WTDWL.

[overstress]

Would you agree this would be a fair tactic,an all out strike?.

Would have thought it was one of the very likely options :eek:

[Tandemrotor]

We won't get the choice.

It's going to be a 'lock out'!

Suits me. :}

[BA FAIR MANAGER]

BA pilots will not tolerate being forced to compete for their own jobs.
BA pilots are not afraid to stand up to a bullying, greedy management.

Wow ! Written as though we really are in one of those time warps that has launched us back to the 70s !

C'mon guys and gals you need to wake up to the new competitive World, most other facets of this business have put behind them, the Nationalised Industry ethic some decades ago..

Look - I'm not looking to incite here. Why is it the rest of the business sees the need for this to be a seperate lower cost model, and do not see this as a threat to our existance. What makes this, a unique issue for pilots ? No no really, I'd like to know with no animosity or anything. I believe we need to come out from the whole "BA Fat cat, latte swilling mangers versus the rest" crap and without the "BA Pilots will not" blah... and get back to realising we all work for the same reason, not because we are all flag waving, banner carrying nutters, but because we all want to take home our dosh and do the things we REALLY want to be doing, so lets cut the "them and us" rhetorical B.S and understand the real issue. I'll promise to do my bit - I'm not hiding behind any agenda, I genuinely want to understand w/o the bells and whistles - Like others do, no doubt.

[tiger-palm]

Unfortunately, if you give an inch they'll take a mile - any weakness is fatal, ....too many BA managers with agenda's these days.
Bring back the 70's.:ok:

[BA FAIR MANAGER]

I may not be in the circles or corridoors for this behaviour. Yes, I will agree that there is always a desire to look at cost reduction in all aspects of the business and yes, there is always likely to be challenge on our industrial agreements. I'm positive that if I were working under the same agreements my union had back in the 70s, I would be personally wealthier. However, I accept that the business has had to refine itself over the time and as someone joining at a later point in time, my hourly take-home is likely to be relatively lower once you allow for RPI etc... We are in a fiercely competitve industry... I knew I should have studied or I.T !!

Rgds

[haughtney1]

I wonder if the shoe were on the other foot?

Hand over the cash gentleman (http://www.balpa.org/Media---Pr/BA%20Pilots%20Strike4.htm)

[Iva harden]

Haughtney1.....it is how I see it having looked at BALPA website....and the shoe is not on the other foot and is unlikely to be...

[haughtney1]

Iva, I was merely posing the question mate, I'm not an employee of birdseed..nor am I ever likely to be, I am however a member of Balpa....:ok:

Its called playing the devils advocate...

[Autobrake Low]

BA FAIR MANAGER - you have hit the nail on the head. It is precisely those ancient 70's agreements that need to be re-addressed. Namely the schedule K which now that the freedom of openskies has altered the flying environment in which we operate, needs to be re-written to reflect that.
I totally agree that all who operate under the BA banner wish for its success and continued job security. However only a naive fool would allow such an opportunity for management to tear apart our terms and conditions as we know them to go ahead. For all we know - this management might be sincere with its assurances but that would not stop future managaments exploiting the opportunity. On a business level does WW just operate by giving assurances or promises? I very much suspect he does not - rather there are contracts of legal stature. Why then should we be the muppets to say - 'oh well go on then.. if you promise not to harm us..'

[Iva harden]

Bigbrutha, I would not say my post was that inaccurate i think that is a little ott...however thats your opinion and you are welcome to it. I would agree, BALPA would crumble if they lost . BA membership would turn their backs on them. I pay the same percentage as any other pilot but in cash terms it likely to be higher as BA basic is less than mine at this time. You might say that BA get a discount in cash terms, but hey lets not go down that avenue. The crux of my point is that we should not be asked to sub for BALPA, in effect BALPA NEC are saying we will support BA pilots but only 50 % lets hope that is not true for BA pilots sake. As you put it...." think about it ". Our company and many others have had disputes but BALPA has never done for us as they are doing for BA Balpa at this time. Dan Air for example.

[GS-Alpha]

If the money to be made from Openskies would be wiped out by the possibility that it's pilots might want a pay-rise at some point in the future, then it is hardly a viable business plan is it? BA is simply being greedy, and hoping to get away with it. Luckily, BALPA and the BA pilots are not going to let that happen.

The strike ballot closes in 5 minutes. Then watch the share price fall. The shareholders are not going to be happy with you BA managers, unless of course you have a very good argument to put before them.

[Fake Sealion]

I have 3 BA long haul seats booked for my family over Easter. Booked over 6 months ago. Whilst it now seems possible we will suffer a change of carrier AT BEST I wish to record my support for the (assumed) strike action. Such steps to check excessive corporate greed is long overdue.

Off now to buy 3 airbeds!:ok:

[Rumours everywhere]

Well just get PLOS to get A330's instead and it could always be crewed by the 50+ GB pilots that applied to BA after being tangoed. Funnily enough... they all got turned down, without exception!

But then... they never were good enough for you guys! How dare non-BA seniority list pilots fly a BA coloured plane - they'd be crashing all over the place!

[StudentInDebt]

I know of at least one person who got through Rumours Everywhere.

[Rumours everywhere]

... who applied BEFORE operation tango..!

[overstress]

Wow ! Written as though we really are in one of those time warps that has launched us back to the 70s !

C'mon guys and gals you need to wake up to the new competitive World, most other facets of this business have put behind them, the Nationalised Industry ethic some decades ago..

BA MANAGER, you say that, then you say you are not out to incite!

I strongly resent your implications. BA pilots are amongst the most task-oriented and 'onside' groups in the company. We regularly exceed our agreed limits, receiving only a 'thank-you' letter as reward. Instead we are forced to wait for transport for up to an hour at the end of a long duty day/night. (Imagine the ruckus if Watersiders were kept waiting for an unspecified period for a bus home at the end of a hard day's latte drinking!)

[Swedish Steve]

We regularly exceed our agreed limits, receiving only a 'thank-you' letter as reward


Wow, a thank you letter. I work unpaid overtime for BA regularly and usually my manager doesn't even know about it. Who sends out the letters?

(Last Tue 0500-1400 then call in at 2200 for A319 hyd leak and worked until 0530). Then enjoyed half my day off in bed, back at 0500 Thur.

Can't do enough for a good co!!!!

[wiggy]

Glad you work for a good "co" Swedish S, must be one of the few..

"overstress" has mentioned the on-going saga/running sore of buses...to me this one issue highlights BA managers complete inability and unwillingness to accept they are managing people, not machines. Most of us ( and I include our Cabin crew Colleagues here) have probablty spent the equivalent of days, if not weeks, over the last few years, stood in cold damp stairwells undr T4 waiting for a bus back from our inbound flight at LHR to the Car Park. I know of one crew last week who ended up doing a 14+ hour night on an Eastern Seaboard LHR flight and then had to wait a further hour + for a bus from the aircraft side....IMHO this shows a complete lack of respect for the workforce, is not acceptable in civilised society in this day and age, and goes some small way to explaining the hardening of the anti-management stance on the shop floor....

Until BA managers actually confront the reality that they are managing people, and learn to listen to, act on their concerns and needs, the strife at BA will continue, well beyond the present spat with BALPA. Sadly I doubt many, if any, of the present managers at BA, up to and including Board Level, are capable of learning any such lesson.

Rant off, waiting for the result in the AM

[Orion Man]

90 odd % in favour is my prediction with a high voting return. We shall see.....

Regards

Orion Man

[stormin norman]

Has anyone in Balpa asked the other (5000+) non BA members if its ok to use up Balpa reserve funds on this strike ?

[Iva harden]

I do not think they give a toss stormin norman. If they lose this battle it is game over for Balpa and they know it, all money on last throw of the dice.

[nicecsd]

Why the obsession with a common seniority list??
How about the new Pilots joining BA after the dispute??
Wont they pay the price in lost seniority to some overseas ones??

[CaptainProp]

Ask the rest of BALPA members??!!! :confused: What a load of BS! Why? 1. The rest of the BALPA members will be totally screwed if our fellow BA colleagues loose/step down on this one. 2. The rest of our fellow members have so far stepped down as soon as there has been a conflict or squeeze on T&Cs (thats why the rest of us "enjoy" lower T&Cs if you have not noticed) so someone might as well use the funds for something useful!

I say - Good luck to all of you BA guys and gals (and to the rest of us!!)!:D

In ezy we are facing very similar issues on the continent. I think its about time we stop "keeping the powder dry" or we'll soon see ourselves working without sick pay, pension and union representation!!! :{

/CP

[overstress]

Why the obsession with a common seniority list??
How about the new Pilots joining BA after the dispute??
Wont they pay the price in lost seniority to some overseas ones??

nicecsd:

point 1: so that the company cannot drive a wedge between us, we will be one body

point 2: they can bid across to mainline if they are on the seniority list

point 3: they won't pay any price if they are on the seniority list

It's all about preventing the fragmentation of the workforce.

[BA FAIR MANAGER]

Instead we are forced to wait for transport for up to an hour at the end of a long duty day/night.

Overstress - I totally agree with your position w.r.t the lousy transportation situation, just another one of our rubblish SLA's that we seem to allow to continue, much the same as the lousy resourcing the BAA have of the Control Posts around the place !

With the problems we had at T4 yesterday, I droppped my work and went over to assist in the chaos. [No thankyou letters will ensue, it is an expectation. Under the circumstances, I'm not lookng for one either]. It's annoying and frustration to then get home having done in effect to consecutuve shifts, to find our PR dept has done little to help the public distinguish between THE BAA and BA !!

I have digressed somewhat, back to the point in hand...I'm still not clear from BOTH sides of this debate as to what the percieved benefits and issues are w.r.t retaining the existing seniority number system in an outfit like O.S ?? One item I am aware of, is that if we considered O.S as a subset of Mainline, our crew would have complete flexability to move freely between postings, whilst retaining, or indeed climbing up the payscales. It has been made clear that the model that enables O.S to exist is that everthing needs to be bought in from LIDL (OK, slightly fippant, but I believe people know what I mean here..). If there was this type of freedom, could this drive up the unite cost per pilot in the O.S model ?? I guess on the flipside of this, is a top of payscale C744 going to bid for a C757 posting ..?? Me thinks not...
I know I will be at risk of being told of for not reading the previous 30 odd pages here, but if there has been an offer of Secondment for Mainline crew whilst retaining seniority, what is the problem ? This protects your position to rejoin Mainline and protects your future postings/awards (Been doing a bit of homework - Impressed ?? ).
I'm guessing I will not have time to follow up again on this topic before we know the ballot result, so thanks in anticipation of some responses and despite the cynics, I DO hope this issue is resolved for the benefit of us all. Safe flying always

[BA FAIR MANAGER]

Crapweasel !

has anyone else typed a length response in here and hit send, only to find it vanished ??

Oh well, an abridged version...

Overstessed - I agree, the bus situation IS lousy as is the BAA's inability to resource the security Control Posts at key times.

Worked an additional shift in T4 yesterday (No thankyou cards expected) only to get home and find our PR people have still not managed to get the puiblic to distinguish the difference between THE BAA and BA.. damn annoying.

Back to the issue in hand... Costs - By having a common senioritry list between O.S and Mainline, there is the potential to introduce the relative high cost base associated with Bidline into a model that requires everything to be bought in from LIDL (Slightly flippant, but i'm sure you know what I mean). High cost base = model that will not work = No O.S outfit = Lost opportunity that will no doubt be emulated by a competitor..

"Driving a wedge between us" Hmmm genuinely not convinced on that one as there have been previous examples of BA start ups that have not demonstrated this. I don't believe our GSS crews feel they are penalised or ostracised for seconding themselves..? However, I dont believe we would have a current C744 bidding for C757 unless they are planning to make JFK / CDG etc.. home.. Nah, the bottom line is for the O.S business to succeed is to keep costs down. Secondment will protect mainline seniority and does not penalise people from the usual positing / award process. New entrants to O.S would and should not have the same arrangement is my view. I'm sure their "Management" payscales will be commensurate as will all the other roles, I see no reason why crew should be different..

Phew ! and this is an abridged version !

Look - Unlikley to squeeze any reposnses in to your responses before the ballot result. I just hope this gets resolved sensibly.

Safe flying always

[markespana]

it will be resolved sensibly by Mr Walsh putting the OS guys on our list and protecting all our futures . Balpa have said this will be a zero cost option and if at some time in the future when OS is making money then we can try for better t&c´s .
Resonable solution.
Unlike the arrogant BA mangers attitude that they are right all the time.:ugh:


ps If you are not out to incite why have you got a name like BA Fair manager !! :rolleyes: